THE EFFECTS OF CONCEPT MAPPING AND QUESTIONING ON
STUDENTS’ ORGANIZATION AND RETENTION OF SCIENCE
KNOWLEDGE WHILE USING INTERACTIVE INFORMATIONAL
READ-ALOUDS
A Dissertation
by
JAIME LEIGH BERRY
Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of
Texas A&M University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
August 2011
Major Subject: Curriculum and Instruction
The Effects of Concept Mapping and Questioning on Students’ Organization and
Retention of Science Knowledge While Using Interactive Informational Read-Alouds
Copyright 2011 Jaime Leigh Berry
THE EFFECTS OF CONCEPT MAPPING AND QUESTIONING ON
STUDENTS’ ORGANIZATION AND RETENTION OF SCIENCE
KNOWLEDGE WHILE USING INTERACTIVE INFORMATIONAL
READ-ALOUDS
A Dissertation
by
JAIME LEIGH BERRY
Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of
Texas A&M University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Approved by:
Co-Chairs of Committee, Erin McTigue
John Helfeldt
Committee Members,
Dennie Smith
Sharolyn Pollard-Durodola
Head of Department,
Dennie Smith
August 2011
Major Subject: Curriculum and Instruction
iii
ABSTRACT
The Effects of Concept Mapping and Questioning on Students’ Organization and
Retention of Science Knowledge While Using Interactive Read-Alouds. (August 2011)
Jaime Leigh Berry, B.S., Sam Houston State University;
M.Ed., Stephen F. Austin State University
Co-Chairs of Advisory Committee: Dr. Erin McTigue
Dr. John Helfeldt
According to recent assessment data, there is an urgent need to improve students’
knowledge of science. It has been suggested that the infusion of reading activities
including concept mapping, questioning and interactive read-alouds can help students in
learning science concepts. Little or no research has combined these methods to examine
its effect on learning. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare concept
mapping and questioning on students’ organization and retention of science knowledge
when used with interactive informational read-alouds of science trade books. This study
included 58 third grade students from four homogenous classes who were assigned to
either a concept mapping group (experimental group) or a questioning with writing
group (comparison group). With the same teacher, the school science specialist, the
students completed an eight day unit regarding “soil formation” comprised of readalouds, discussions and reading comprehension activities. (There were no hands-on,
laboratory experiments.) Students were assessed on different types of knowledge.
iv
Data were analyzed using a mixed model ANOVA design to determine both
within-factors (repeated measure), to show growth, and between-factors, to determine
the difference between the two groups. The concept mapping group (experimental
group) performed significantly higher than the questioning with writing group
(comparison) on (a) relational vocabulary assessment (measuring relational knowledge);
(b) multiple-choice assessment (measuring students’ ability to identify key ideas); and
(c) writing assessment (measuring students’ relational thinking, students’ ability to retain
and recall key information and students’ ability to use domain knowledge). The concept
mapping group maintained these gains in a delayed assessment. The groups did not
differ on individual word knowledge as measured by a matching assessment.
Recommendations are provided for teachers and researchers including using
concept mapping in teaching science concepts to elementary students in conjunction
with science text reading, as well as incorporating technology with computer-generated
concept maps using Inspiration software.
v
DEDICATION
This is dedicated to my mother, Sandra, whose dream finally came true.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To my co-chairs, Dr. Erin McTigue and Dr. John Helfeldt, I will be forever
grateful for their time, support and encouragement. They were both my inspiration in
finishing my doctoral program. I want to thank Dr. Erin McTigue, who is the epitome of
excellence. Her dedication to her students is one to be admired. She is truly one of the
most influential individuals in my life. I want to thank Dr. John Helfeldt for his
encouragement and expertise. He took me under his wing from the first day I met him.
To Dr. Dennie Smith, who has been an incredible department head. He has always been
there for me and for all the TLAC graduate students. He was the driving force in making
our graduate experience one to be cherished and remembered. To Dr. Sharolyn PollardDurodola; I have learned so much from her with her incredible expertise in education.
She always had words of encouragement for me especially when the road got rough. I
am so grateful to have met such an amazing and brilliant professor as Dr. PollardDurodola.
To Dr. Homer Tolson who is an amazing professor and always made his students
a priority. I want to thank him for his endless hours of help and assistance in statistics. I
will truly miss him. To Dr. Cindy Boettcher who was an answered prayer, her words of
wisdom were priceless. To Dr. Malt Joshi, Dr. Mark Sadoski, and Dr. Donna Nortonthank you for being amazing professors.
I am grateful for Kerri Smith for all her guidance throughout my program. To
Tammy, Kelly, Joan, and Andrea-thank you for all your assistance throughout the years.
vii
Thank you to my A&M friends, Ramona Pittman, Lori Graham, Emily Binks, Angie
Harrell, Lawrence Perkins, Xixi Chen, Homayra Moghadassian.
A special thank you for the individuals in Humble ISD who helped me with the
dissertation study. To Melinda Butler, a lifelong friend, I will always cherish our time
together. To April Sanders, Karen Weeks, and Dr.Warren Roane who were all
instrumental in making a plan on paper a reality.
To God who made a dream possible. To my fiance, Drew, who has always been
my cheerleader and comic relief. To my family, I appreciate your endless love and
support. To my father who provided spiritual, emotional and finance support bringing a
dream to fruition. To my sisters, Sonja, Angie and Tracy, who always had words of
encouragement. Every one of these special ladies reflects our mother’s legacy in their
laughter, intelligence, determination and compassion. To my uncles, David and Dennis, I
appreciate all your wisdom and knowledge. They are two of the most influential and
intelligent individuals in my life. To Karen Geffert who is like a second mother. God
brought her into my life for so many reasons, and I will be eternally grateful. Lastly, to
my mother, Sandra, who was my inspiration and who always believed in me.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................
iii
DEDICATION ..........................................................................................................
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................................
viii
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................
xi
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................
xii
CHAPTER
I
II
III
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................
1
Rationale for the Study ..................................................................
Purpose of the Study .....................................................................
Research Questions .......................................................................
Definition of Terms .......................................................................
4
8
8
9
REVIEW OF LITERATURE...............................................................
12
Integration of Science and Literacy................................................
Barriers to Integration of Science and Literacy..............................
Interactive Read-Aloud ..................................................................
Informational Text..........................................................................
Informational Interactive Read-Alouds ..........................................
Graphic Organizers ........................................................................
Concept Mapping ...........................................................................
Theoretical Background of Concept Mapping ...............................
Conclusion ......................................................................................
12
17
18
25
28
29
32
33
38
METHODOLOGY ...............................................................................
39
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................
Participants .....................................................................................
Grouping Assignment ....................................................................
39
40
42
ix
CHAPTER
IV
Page
Timeline .........................................................................................
Materials .........................................................................................
Assessments ...................................................................................
Answering Protocols ......................................................................
Defining the Activities ...................................................................
Concept Mapping Group ................................................................
Comparison Group .........................................................................
Interactive Informational Read-Alouds ..........................................
Post Reading Activities ..................................................................
Concept Mapping ..........................................................................
Comparison ....................................................................................
Day One for Concept Mapping and Comparison Group ................
Procedures for Comparison Group .................................................
Fidelity Measures ...........................................................................
Teacher Training ............................................................................
Research Questions ........................................................................
Significance of the Study ...............................................................
42
45
48
58
58
58
60
60
61
61
62
62
68
70
71
71
72
RESULTS .............................................................................................
73
Analysis of Data ............................................................................. 73
Relational Vocabulary Assessment ................................................ 74
Multiple-Choice Assessment.......................................................... 74
Matching Vocabulary Assessment ................................................. 75
Writing Assessment........................................................................ 75
Relational Vocabulary .................................................................... 76
Between-Factors Analysis for Relational Vocabulary ................... 79
Within-Factor Analysis for Relational Vocabulary ....................... 81
Multiple-Choice ............................................................................. 85
Between-Factors Analysis for Multiple-Choice ............................. 86
Within-Factors Analysis for Multiple-Choice................................ 88
Matching Vocabulary ..................................................................... 92
Between-Factors Analysis for Matching Vocabulary .................... 94
Within-Factor Analysis for Matching Vocabulary......................... 95
Writing Assessment........................................................................ 99
Between-Factors Analysis for Writing Assessment ....................... 101
Within-Factor Analysis for Writing Assessment ........................... 103
x
CHAPTER
V
Page
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 107
Research Questions ........................................................................
Conclusion ......................................................................................
Relational Knowledge ....................................................................
Recalling Key Ideas .......................................................................
Written Expression .........................................................................
Individual Word Learning ..............................................................
Delayed-Recall of Information.......................................................
Concluding Thoughts .....................................................................
Limitations .....................................................................................
Implications for Teaching & Research ...........................................
Future Directions ............................................................................
108
109
110
114
117
118
123
126
127
128
128
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 132
APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................... 149
APPENDIX B ........................................................................................................... 155
APPENDIX C ........................................................................................................... 161
APPENDIX D ........................................................................................................... 162
VITA ......................................................................................................................... 173
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
1
2
3
4
5
6
Page
Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison
Group at Different Time-Points for the Relational Vocabulary
Assessment .................................................................................................
79
Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time-Points for
Relational Vocabulary Assessment ............................................................
83
Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and the Comparison
Group at Different Time-Points for the Multiple-Choice Assessment ......
86
Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time-Points for
Multiple-Choice Assessment......................................................................
90
Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison
Group at Different Time-Points for the Matching Vocabulary
Assessment .................................................................................................
93
Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time-Points for
Matching Vocabulary Assessment .............................................................
97
7
Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison
Group at Different Time-Points for the Writing Assessment .................... 101
8
Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time-Points for
Writing Assessment.................................................................................... 105
9
Frayer Model .............................................................................................. 121
xii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
Page
1
Suggested Questions for Interactive Read-Alouds.....................................
22
2
Timeline for Study .....................................................................................
44
3
Informational Interactive Text Set for the Read-Alouds ............................
46
4
Assessments ...............................................................................................
49
5
Concepts for Each Day ...............................................................................
54
6
Lessons for Day 1 .......................................................................................
55
7
Mean Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison
Group for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment .....................................
77
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment.................
78
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Relational Vocabulary
Assessment .................................................................................................
80
10
Analysis of Variance for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment ..............
82
11
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping Group
and the Comparison Group for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment ....
84
Mean Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison
Group for the Multiple-Choice Assessment ...............................................
85
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Multiple-Choice Assessment ..........................
85
14
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Multiple-Choice Assessment .....
87
15
Analysis of Variance for the Multiple-Choice Assessment .......................
89
8
9
12
13
xiii
TABLE
16
Page
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping
Group and the Comparison Group for the Multiple-Choice Assessment ..
91
Means Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison
Group for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment ......................................
92
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment ..................
92
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Matching Vocabulary
Assessment .................................................................................................
94
20
Analysis of Variance for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment ...............
96
21
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping
Group and the Comparison Group for the Matching Vocabulary
Assessment .................................................................................................
98
Means Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison
Group for the Writing Assessment .............................................................
99
17
18
19
22
23
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Writing Assessment ........................................ 100
24
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Writing Assessment ................... 102
25
Analysis of Variance for the Writing Assessment ..................................... 104
26
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping Group
and the Comparison Group for the Writing Assessment............................ 106
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
We live in a society with the need for advanced science skills (Pearson, Moje &
Greenleaf, 2010) however the latest assessment data casts doubt on whether our students
are being adequately prepared for this goal.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, 2009) conducts a
nationwide assessment in the areas of Math, Reading, and Science to determine the
performances levels of our students. According to the 2009 NAEP National Report of
Science, 29% of fourth grade students in the United States performed below the basic
level while only 39% performed at the basic level. Only 28% of students performed at
the proficient level and only 1% of students performed at the advanced level. Students in
grade eight had similar results with 38% of students performing below basic and 33%
performing at the basic level. Only 28% of the students performed at the proficient level
and only 1% performed at the advanced level. In total, the majority of students are
performing either at the below basic level or basic level at a time when advanced science
skills are a prerequisite to be successful in a high-technology society. Researchers also
suggest that United States’ students are performing behind students in other developed
and developing countries (Bybee, McCrae, & Laurie, 2009; Fensham, 2009).
____________
This dissertation follows the style of Reading & Writing Quarterly.
2
To consider comparisons across countries, the Programme for International
Assessment (PISA) was created by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (Bybee, et al., 2009). This test is administered every three years to 15year-old students from participating countries to assess their knowledge and skills of
Reading, Math and Science Literacy. In the 2009 assessment, 28 countries out of 65
countries (OECD and non-OECD countries) scored higher than the United States
reinforcing the need to strengthen our science instruction in order to be competitive in a
global society. Many researchers have pondered why students are having difficulty in
learning science concepts.
Some researchers have suggested that the nature of scientific text can be a barrier
for students learning science. Convergent research (Pearson et al, 2010; Heller &
Greenleaf, 2007) indicates a need for explicit literacy strategies within content area
instruction, particularly science, for students to gain proficiency with understanding
challenging texts. Despite overlap, every discipline and genre of writing comes with its
unique literacy, and science is particularly challenging (Fang, 2006). Proficient skills in
science and reading are a prerequisite to be productive members of society. First of all,
individuals must be able to use scientific processes in everyday decision-making and
must possess the scientific background knowledge to make sound decisions (National
Standards, 1996). Next, individuals must have the literacy tools to read and comprehend
informational articles about current scientific topics that affect their lives (e.g.
salmonella, cancer research) (Draper, 2011). In addition, many individuals will have
roles in society that require science and literacy skills including teachers, engineers,
3
scientists, and researchers (National Standards, 1996). However, current instructional
practices, in which reading and content instruction are typically separated, often leave
students unable to handle the more challenging demands of content texts (Shanahan &
Shanahan, 2008).
Additionally, among content texts, the nature of scientific text in particular can
be challenging for students (Van de Broek, 2010; Conderman & Elf, 2007) because of its
organizational structure and its often inconsiderate writing style which can include an
abundant amount of information while assuming too much prior knowledge (Armbruster
& Anderson 1988; Abadiano & Turner, 2002). In addition, there is often a large amount
of irrelevant information (Abadiano & Turner, 2002) in science texts. However,
incorporating a repertoire of metacognitive reading strategies can be beneficial to
students. For example, Michalsky, Mevarch and Haibi (2009) found that infusing
literacy instructional strategies, including concept mapping, questioning techniques and
making connections, had a positive impact on science performance.
While the integration of science and reading instruction has shown to yield
benefits which are further summarized in the literature review, there is much debate on
which instructional practices are the most effective in learning science concepts
including the following: informational text (informational trade books); interactive readalouds; graphic organizers, specifically concept maps; and questioning. The review of
literature will examine previous research on these instructional practices.
4
Rationale for the Study
The integration of science and reading instruction can increase academic
performance in both domains (Michalsky, Mevarch & Haibi, 2009). In this study the
instructional framework included the following instructional practices: informational
text (informational trade books), interactive read-alouds, concept mapping and concept
questioning. Selection of the elements was based on proven empirical evidence of their
effectiveness on learning (Robinson, Katayama, Beth, Hsieh & Vanderveen, 2006;
Oliver, 2009; Heisey & Kucan, 2010).
Informational text. Informational text is imperative in science instruction. There
has been a heightened interest in the use of informational trade books in teaching science
concepts as an effective supplement or substitution for textbooks (Schroeder, Mckeough,
Graham, Stock & Bisanz, 2009; Fang & Wei, 2010; Donovan & Smolkin, 2003). This
can be attributed to the limitations and drawbacks of textbooks including their
ineffective use of graphics and visual representations (Slough, McTigue, Kim &
Jennings, 2010; Lee, 2010), readability (Hiebert, 2005) and text organization
(Armbruster, 1986). Informational trade books focus on a topic of study and include
formal language patterns, examples and rich illustrations that can aide in students’
understanding especially of vocabulary (Saul & Dieckman, 2005). They have been
shown to benefit students in their learning of science concepts (Heisey & Kucan, 2010)
and they can capitalize on children’s curiosity and interests about the world (Duke,
2003; Palmer & Stewart, 2003). Use of such texts has been proven to motivate reluctant
readers (Smolkin & Donovan, 2003; Abadiano & Turner, 2002). In fact, they have been
5
shown to foster motivation and engagement in literacy and nonfiction (Guthrie, 1997;
Guthrie & McCann, 1997). Informational trade books are effective tool for introducing
vocabulary because terms are simplified through the use of examples and illustrations.
Furthermore, exposure to informational text, especially in the primary grades, prepares
students to utilize this genre in later grades.
Interactive read-alouds. In Becoming a Nation of Readers (Anderson, Hiebert,
Wilkinson & Scott, 1985), published by the National Academy of Education and the
Center for the Study of Reading, it was stated that “the single most important activity for
building the knowledge required for eventual success in reading is reading aloud to
children” (p.33). There has been a vast amount of research on the benefits of reading
aloud to children (Beck & McKeown, 2001b; Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002).
Recently, there has been an increase of recommendations for the use of conversation or
“discussion” during the read-aloud process, also referred to as interactive read-alouds.
Interactive read-alouds have been shown to be useful in teaching science
concepts especially when working with low struggling readers (Heisey & Kucan, 2010;
Smolkin & Donovan, 2003). The interaction allows students to make interpretations,
offer suggestions and ask questions (Heisey & Kucan, 2010). This format can be used in
conjunction with informational trade books.
Graphic organizers. Ausubel (1963), a cognitive psychologist, created graphic
organizers to help students in their facilitation of learning. He suggested that learning
takes place by the assimilation of new concepts and propositions into existing concepts
and propositional frameworks, also referred to as their cognitive structure (Ausubel,
6
1963; Novak & Canas, 2008). When the cognitive structure expands by the addition of
new information, learning takes place. The graphic organizer was created to provide
learners with a meaningful framework for connecting existing knowledge to new
knowledge (Ausubel, 1963; Kim, Vaughn, Wanzek, & Wei, 2004).
There have been a substantial number of studies on the beneficial use of graphic
organizers on learning, especially in content areas including science, math, and social
studies (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002; Alvermann & Boothby, 1983; Braselton & Decker,
1994; Jang, 2010). There have also been several cognitive theories associated with the
effectiveness of this instructional tool including: visual argument (Waller, 1981); dual
coding theory (Paivio, 1986; Paivio, 2006); cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1993;
Sweller, 2006); and conjoint-retention hypothesis theory (Kulhavy, Lee & Caterino,
1985). These theories will be further discussed in the literature review.
Concept maps, a specific type of graphic organizer, have been shown repeatedly
to aid students’ understanding of informational text and to promote deeper levels of
learning (Jang, 2010; Kern, 2008; Schaal, Bogner, Girwidz, 2009; Robinson, Katayama,
Beth, Hsieh & Vanderveen, 2006; DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). Novak, created the
concept map as a tool to represent students’ understanding and meaning of science
concepts and prepositions (Novak & Godwin, 1984; Novak, 2005). The main goal of this
graphic tool is to organize and represent knowledge (Novak & Godwin, 1984; Novak &
Canas, 2006).
Questioning. The use of teacher-generated questioning has proven to have
positive effects on comprehension (Harvey & Goudvis, 2007). First of all, the use of
7
questioning can promote student understanding by focusing attention of the important
details including the author’s purpose (Miller, 2002). This instructional strategy can be
beneficial to clarifying meaning as well minimizing students’ misinterpretation of
information (Miller, 2002; Heilman, Blair & Rupley). Questioning can also aide in
activating prior knowledge by activating students’ experiential and conceptual
backgrounds (Heilman, Blair & Rupley, 2002) promoting deep processing of
information (McKeown & Beck, 1993).
Raphael (1984) suggests there are two types of sources of information for
answering questions: “in the book” and “in the reader’s head”. The source of “in the
book” refers to “right there” questions (answer in easily found in text) and “think and
search” (answer in different parts of text). The other source, “in the reader’s head” refers
to “author and you” (answer in not in text; background knowledge is used) and “on my
own” (answer is not in story; background knowledge is used).
But yet, there have been several criticisms to using questioning as an
instructional method (Feldt, et al., 2002). First, students may search for important ideas
to memorize instead of making connections and increasing relational knowledge (Cook
& Mayer, 1983). Secondly, some of the questions that may be used, especially publisherprovided, fail to promote higher cognitive levels (Feldt, et al., 2002).
However, effective questioning has also been shown to promote students’
understanding (Heisey & Kucan, 2010; Walker, 2005; Lloyd, 2004; Fisher, Flood, Lapp
& Frey, 2004; Shearer, 1997) but most questions are not designed to promote
connections between ideas in the same manner as concept mapping.
8
Purpose of the Study
The study included 58 students enrolled in four third-grade classes. The
objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of reading activities
including concept mapping and comprehension questions in association with
interactive read-alouds in the organization and retention of different types of science
information.
Research Questions
The following are the research questions used in this study:
a). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ performance on a test of relational vocabulary?
b). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ ability to identify key ideas on a multiple-choice test?
c). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ individual word knowledge as measured by a vocabulary
matching test?
d). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ clarity of written expression as measured by a holistically
scored writing test?
9
Definition of Terms
The following definitions are offered for terms used in this study.
Graphic organizers. Graphic organizers are visual instructional tools that help
students organize ideas and concepts (Ausubel, 1963). They are also referred to as
advanced graphic organizers, and adjunct displays. There are a variety of types of
graphic organizers including concept maps, venn diagrams, sequencing chart and KWL
charts.
Concept maps. Concept maps were created by Novak to help assess students’
learning of science concepts. Concept maps consist of shapes with lines that connect the
shapes by prepositions. The concept map has been shown to be conducive to relational
learning as well as helping lessen cognitive load (Novak & Godwin, 1984).
Interactive read-alouds. Interactive read-alouds are read-alouds with the use of
“discussion” or talk (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Smolkin & Donovan, 2003). In an
interactive-read-aloud, a teacher models the reading process while engaging the students
in discussion through sharing and posing questions (Smolkin & Donovan, 2003; Beck &
McKeown, 2001a). Key features in an interactive read-aloud include the following:
interaction; modeling of the reading process; and the use of talking.
Informational text. Informational text is text that is content-specific. This can
include textbooks, journal articles and informational trade books. For the purpose of this
study, the following science informational trade books focusing on soil formation were
used: Sand and Soil: Earth’s Building Blocks by Beth Gurney; Without Soil by Ashley
Chase and Marco Bravo; Dirt by Nancy Goodman; Soil Erosion and How to Prevent It
10
by Natalie Hyde (2010); Erosion by Becky Olien (2001); Minerals by Rebecca Faulkner
(2007); Wiggling Worms at Work by Wendy Pfeffer (2003); and Composting: Nature’s
Recyclers (2002) by Michael Koontz.
Informational trade books. Informational trade books are picture books that
are content specific. Informational trade books are different than textbooks in several
ways. Unlike textbooks that are written by multiple authors, informational trade books
are usually written by one author (Smolkin, McTigue, Donovan, & Coleman, 2008).
They also have been shown to be more interesting than textbooks in learning information
by the use of reader-friendly language and aesthetic graphics (Schroeder, et al., 2009;
Smolkin, et al., 2008). As an advantageous tool for learning, there has been increase in
the using this genre in the teaching of content areas of science and social studies (Saul &
Dieckman, 2005.
Questioning. For purpose of this study, written teacher-generated questioning
consisted of comprehension questions regarding science instruction. Students in this
group were asked questions pertaining to soil. For example, one question asked was the
following: “What do you know about soil?”. Students were given time to write down
their response to each question.
Concept mapping group. The concept mapping group is the experimental
group (treatment group) in this study. Participants in this group participated in concept
mapping during their science instruction.
Comparison group. Comparison groups are composed of participants similar
(e.g. intelligence, demographics, age) to participants in the experimental group but
11
participate in a different type of instruction. The comparison group refers to the students
that participated in the use of questioning during their science instruction.
12
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter is organized into six sections. The first section is a review of
research on the integration of science and literacy. The second section examines
literature on the use of interactive read-alouds. Next, informational text and its use in
early grades will be examined. Then, the fourth section will discuss interactive
informational read-alouds. Next, is an investigation on the use of graphic organizers. The
last section examines the use of concept maps as a tool for learning.
Integration of Science and Literacy
The integration of reading and science is not a new concept. In fact, scientists
have integrated the two for centuries (Pearson, Moje, Greenleaf, 2010). To help students
to experience science in its true state, then teachers must provide a learning environment
that promotes the integration of science and literacy.
With the increase of scientific epidemics from salmonella illnesses (Draper,
2011) to cloning (Rupley & Slough 2011), it has never been such a crucial time than
now for one to be scientifically knowledgeable or as Fang and Wei (2010) term, a
“scientifically literate citizen”.
The National Science Education Standards define science literacy as the following:
Scientific literacy means that a person can ask, find, or determine
answers to questions derived from curiosity about everyday experiences.
It means that a person has the ability to describe, explain, and predict
13
natural phenomena. Scientific literacy entails being able to read with
understanding articles about science in the popular press and to engage in
social conversation about the validity of the conclusions. Scientific
literacy implies that person can identify scientific issues underlying
national and local decisions and express positions that are scientifically
and technologically informed. A literate citizen should be able to evaluate
the quality of scientific information on the basis of the sources and the
methods used to generate it. Scientific literacy also implies the capacity to
pose and evaluate arguments based on evidence and to apply conclusions
from such arguments appropriately.
Individuals will display their scientific literacy in different ways,
such as appropriately using technical terms, or applying scientific
concepts and processes. And individuals often will have differences in
literacy in different domains, such as more understanding of life-science
concepts and words, and less understanding of physical-science concepts
and words. (Science Standards, 1996, pp. 2)
As evidenced above, a key factor in the preceding definition is the need for
“literacy” skills. One must be able to read and most importantly understand text, articles,
and journals to learn about scientific phenomena. Scientific literacy also implies that
one must be able to write and communicate effectively to make informed decisions.
Accordingly, researchers have suggested that literacy is an integral part of learning
science (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). Furthermore, they have suggested that the use of
14
metacognitive reading practices such as using graphic organizers and incorporating
informational trade books can help in learning science concepts. These instructional
practices will be discussed in further sections in this literature review.
Researchers and educators deem the integration of reading with science or other
academic domains (e.g., math, social studies) as, “content area literacy” (Romance &
Vitale, 2001; Moss, 2005). The idea of content area literacy has been around as early as
1925, when Gray conducted a study regarding literacy and study skills by content area
(Vacca, 2002; & Moss, 2005). Gray surveyed 250 teachers in grades 4-6 to examine the
types of reading used in different subject areas such as literature or history. He found
that reading and study skills varied according to the subject (Vacca, 2002) suggesting
that every content area has its own unique set of literacy skills. Interestingly, the first
textbook devoted to content area literacy was published in 1970 by Herber which
stressed that reading skills must be adapted to the content area subject they are studying
(Vacca, 2002).
Several previous studies have examined the impact of science content area
literacy on students’ learning of science (e.g., Fang & Wei, 2010; Romance & Vitale,
2001) and are therefore pertinent to the current study. Most recently, Fang and Wei
(2010) examined the impact of reading strategies on learning science concepts with
middle school students. Students were divided into either an inquiry-based science group
or an inquiry-based science plus reading group. The inquiry-based science group was
comprised of traditional science instruction including making observations, predicting,
planning investigations and interpreting data. The inquiry-based plus reading group had
15
a similar type of instruction as the other group but included reading strategy instruction
and a home science reading program integrated in the curriculum. They found that
participants in the inquiry-based plus reading group outperformed participants in the
comparison group in vocabulary and comprehension as measured by the GMRT.
Previously, Romance and Vitale’s (2001) findings of the benefit of literacy for
learning science were consistent with Fang and Wei’s results but focused on elementary
students. Romance and Vitale (2001) reported their findings over a 5-year period with
students in grades 2-5 over the implementation of a program called In-depth Expanded
Applications of Science (IDEAS). The IDEAS model replaced the traditional
reading/language arts model with a daily two-hour block comprised of in-depth science
concept instruction including the following: concept-focused teaching; hands-on
activities; utilization of science process skills; enhanced reading of trade books science
materials; concept mapping instruction; and journal writing. They found results that
were consistent over the five year program favoring the IDEA program in both science
understanding as measured by the Metropolitan Achievement Test-Science as well as
reading, as measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills-Reading and the Stanford
Achievement Tests-Reading. They also found students exhibited more positive attitudes
and self-confidence toward both science and reading.
Additionally, Morrow, Pressley, Smith & Smith (1997) found similar results
when they investigated the impact of a literature-based program integrated into literacy
and science instruction on third grade students’ achievement. Students were assigned to
one of three groups: control, literature-based, literature-based with science. Reading and
16
science instruction in the control group consisted of basal materials and workbooks for
reading instruction and science textbooks and workbooks for science instruction. This
followed their traditional model of instruction for reading and science. Reading
instruction for the literature-based group consisted of the following: literacy centers
containing different books with a variety of genres; teacher guided literacy activities
such as retelling and writing; and independent reading and writing periods. Their
science instruction was identical to that of the control group. The reading instruction for
the third group, literature-based with science was identical to the literature-based group.
The science instruction consisted of students reading trade books that were aligned with
the textbook chapter topics and students writing narrative stories embedded with science
facts. They found that participants in the literature-based with science group scored
significantly better on all literacy measurements than students in the literature-based
group. Students in the literature-based group performed significantly higher on all
literacy measures except for the standardized reading than students in the control group.
In the test of science facts and vocabulary, the literature-based with science group scored
significantly higher than the literature-based group and the control group.
In summary, these three highlighted studies document the benefit of integrating
reading and science instruction on student achievement. However, unfortunately, not
every teacher has embraced this practice. Next, we will examine some barriers facing
teachers in the integration of science and reading.
17
Barriers to Integrating Science and Literacy
Some teachers of content area subjects are reluctant to see their role as a
“reading” teacher. They view that teaching reading is “somebody else’s job” (Donahue,
2003). Even English teachers think of themselves as experts in teaching literature and
writing but few view themselves the same way in teaching reading (Ericson, 2001).
Many in fact, feel that teaching reading skills is the role of elementary teachers
(Donahue, 2003; Alger, 2007). But yet even with this in mind, teachers, especially
middle and high school teachers, are need to teach content area material but are
challenged by students’ difficulty in reading challenging text important to the content
area studying.
Technical in nature, these content area textbooks, especially in science, provide
little guidance on how to incorporate reading instruction. This warrants the need for staff
development to share explicit strategies for teachers how to effectively incorporate
reading strategies (Draper, 2011). There has also been an increase in teaching content
area literacy practices to pre-service teachers by providing courses. But unfortunately,
one area of concern is the textbooks used in these courses. Draper (2011) conducted a
study examining nine textbooks used in methods courses for pre-service teachers on
content area literacy. Draper found that, although the authors stressed the importance of
content area literacy, they provided little or no explanations on how to incorporate
effective literacy practices in content area subjects.
Another barrier facing teachers is the lack of resources and time needed to
effectively integrate science and literacy (Pearson et al., 2010). With the pressure of
18
high-stakes testing, teachers feel compelled to focus on one subject area -- whether it be
science or reading. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has been accredited to decreasing the
amount of time devoted to science instruction by placing emphasis on promoting reading
and math (cite needed). In a 2008 national survey, it was discovered that the majority of
schools across the United States had decreased their science instructional time by 15
minutes due to the NCLB promotion of reading and math (Pearson et al., 2010). School
districts and teachers felt pressured to increase their focus on reading and math and in
result, decreased their attention on other content areas including science (Pearson et al.,
2010). This trend will prove detrimental to our students facing a future with a
prerequisite of advanced science skills which demand scientific communication skills.
There is a strong urgency to build content area literacy into our classrooms from
the elementary to the secondary schools but many are faced with barriers as previously
discussed. As an education community, we need to continue efforts to stress the
importance of content area literacy and its impact on student learning through advocacy,
staff development and continued research.
An instructional practice that has shown to have additive benefits to learning is
the use of read-alouds. This topic is examined in the following sections.
Interactive Read-Aloud
Read-alouds have been a wide-spread practice in classrooms as well as homes for
centuries (Beck & McKeown, 2001b). This practice has shown to be beneficial to
learning (Tease, 2003). Becoming a Nation of Readers (Anderson, Hiebert, Wilkinson &
Scott, 1985) issued by the National Academy of Education and the Center for the Study
19
of Reading concluded that “the single most important activity for building the
knowledge required for eventual success in reading is reading aloud to children” (p. 33).
Recently, there has been an increase in the use of conversation or discussion with the use
of read-alouds, also referred to as “interactive read-alouds” which will be further
discussed in the following sections.
In an interactive-read-aloud, a teacher models the reading process while engaging
students in discussion through sharing and posing questions (Smolkin & Donovan, 2003;
Beck & McKeown, 2001b). Another definition of an interactive read-aloud is by Fountas
and Pinnell (2007), “A teaching context in which students are actively listening and
responding to an oral reading of a text” (p. 47). There are several key features in an
interactive read-aloud including: interaction; modeling of the reading process; and the
use of talking. These topics will be examined in the following sections.
Interaction. As a “dialogic” discussion, an interactive read-aloud serves several
purposes. First, students are provided an opportunity to make connections with the text.
Through this cognitive process, a student makes a connection to self, other texts, or to
the world (Harvey & Goudvis, 2007). According to Rosenblatt (1978) reading is a
transactional process. Also referred to as the “transactional view”, Rosenblatt proposed
that a reader must transact with the text to make meaning (Morrison & Wlodarcyzk,
2009; Rosenblatt, 1978). Text may have different meanings for different individuals
because each reader brings his or her own background knowledge and personal
experiences that shape the meaning of the text (Rosenblatt, 1978).
20
Next, the use of questioning is used in this interactive process. Using questioning
strategies has been shown to help increase comprehension because it engages the reader
as well as ensures students’ understanding of the text (Harvey & Goudvis, 2007).
Questioning is used during and after reading a text. Table 1 is found in Beck, McKeown,
Sandora, Kucan and Worthy (1996) and outlines the suggested goals and associated
questions for an interactive read-aloud. For example, to help initiate discussion of the
text, a teacher may ask “What is the author trying to say?” or “What is the author’s
message?” If a student submits a vague response or reveals a misinterpretation, the
teacher is recommended to ask follow-up questions. For example, the teacher may
respond, “Is that all the author wanted us to know?” (Beck & McKeown, 2001b). This
follow-up question encourages the students to dig a little deeper. The next goal is to help
students focus on the author’s message. To facilitate this goal, the teacher may ask
“That’s what the author says, but what does it mean?” This question is an extension of
the first question. This is a great opportunity to assess students’ understanding of the
author’s message. Is the student able to go beyond the superficiality of the text? Are they
able to reference concrete examples taken from the text? The next goal is helping
students link information. By asking questions, “How does that connect with what the
author already told us?” or “What information has the author added here that connects to
or fits in with___________?”, the students are given an opportunity to share how new
knowledge fits in with their own personal schema or background knowledge. It also
aides the teacher in assessing the students’ interpretation of the text.
21
Beck (et al., 1996) suggests the next goal as identifying difficulties with the way
the author has presented information or ideas. This goal is facilitated by asking “Does
that make sense?” or “Did the author explain that clearly? What’s missing?”. In these
questions, the students are self-monitoring their own learning by asking themselves if
they have a clear understanding of the author’s message and if not, what is needed to
clarify their understanding. Lastly, it is imperative to encourage students to refer to the
back to the text when they misinterpret the message. This also helps them in making
inferences. This goal is led by asking “Did the author tell us that?”. This question guides
the student in “reading between the lines” or understanding that they misinterpreted the
text.
The use of questioning in an interactive read-aloud engages the student by
encouraging the sharing of ideas. It also helps in increasing comprehension by provoking
students to think deeper about the text. In addition, it provides an opportunity for
teachers to assess students’ understanding of text and to guide them if and when
meaning breaks down.
22
Table 1
Suggested Questions for Interactive Read-Alouds
Goal
Questions
Initiate discussion
What is the author trying to say?
What is the author’s message?
What is the author talking about?
Help students focus on the author’s
That’s what the author says, but what does
message.
it mean?
Help students link information.
How does that connect with what the
author already told us?
How does that fit with what the author
already told us?
What information has the author added
here that connects to or fits in with
________________?
Identify difficulties with the way the
Does that make sense?
author has presented information or ideas. Is that said in a clear way?
Did the author explain that clearly? Why or
why not? What’s missing? What do we
need to figure out or find out?
Encourage students to refer to the text
either because they’ve misinterpreted a
text statement or to help them recognize
that they’ve made an inference.
Table taken from Beck (et al., 1996).
Did the author tell us that?
Did the author give us the answer to that?
Modeling of reading strategies. Next, I examine another integral part of
interactive read-alouds which is the modeling of reading strategies.
As previously mentioned, interactive read-alouds provides a useful opportunity
for teachers to model reading strategies that proficient readers use (Smolkin & Donovan,
2001). One important subset of these strategies includes metacognitive strategies
because they help the reader monitor and regulate their own cognitive process
(Loxterman, Beck, McKeown, 1994). Examples of metacognitive strategies include the
following: locating where meaning breaks down; making inferences; identifying
23
implicit ideas in a text; as well as including strategies of rereading; backward and
forward searching strategies; and self-questioning (Loxterman, et al., 1994; Hedin &
Conderman, 2010; Oster, 2001). These metacognitive strategies are essential to learning
because they allow learners to assess their own level of comprehension and adjust
strategies as needed (Oster, 2001).
Talking and comprehension of text. Another component to interactive readalouds is the process of “talk” which I examined in reference to its impact on
comprehension of text. The activity of “talk” is used through questioning and modeling
of reading strategies. These processes during the reading of a text have been shown to
have beneficial effects (Beck & McKeown, 2001b). Loxterman et al. (1994) examined
the use of student talk on students’ recall of a social studies textbook passage on sixthgrade students. Students were assigned to one of two groups. One group read the text,
stopped at predetermined places in the text and talked about what they had read as a
group. The participants in the second group read the textbook passage silently. The
researchers found that students in the first group who talked during the reading had
better recall of the text information than the second group who did not talk. Furthermore,
their differences were maintained a week later in a delayed assessment.
A similar study was conducted by Kucan and Beck (2003) examining the impact
on talk on seventh grade students on informational text. There were two conditions used
in this study. One condition consisted of an individual student and an investigator. The
second condition consisted of seven students and an investigator. The purpose of these
conditions was to support students’ effort to comprehend ideas of informational text by
24
talking about the text while reading (Kucan & Beck, 2003). The investigators used
prompts to elicit talk from students including having students explain their own
understanding. They found that students had significant gains from the pre-test timepoint to the post-test time-point. Interestingly, there was not a significance found
between the groups on the recall measure, but the participants in the group condition
increased their use of “intellectual talk”. The researchers transcribed the students’
discussions during the reading and categorized them into four categories: personal,
textual, intellectual and none. The found that participants in the individual condition
spent 11% of the time using personal talk versus 5% for participants in the group
condition. Next, they found that participants in the individual condition spent 82% of the
time using textual talk while the participants in the group condition spent 46%. Then, the
participants in the individual condition spent 3% using intellectual talk while the
participants in the group spent 34% of the time in intellectual talk. Lastly, the “none
category” represented students who declined to respond -- which it was 58% for the
participants in the individual group and only 15% for the participants in the group
condition. These results indicate the value of group “talk” or discussion during reading
text. These studies reinforce the beneficial effect of the process of “talk” in interactive
read-alouds including strengthening comprehension of text and sharing of ideas
regarding the text.
25
Informational Text
By the time students are in middle school, the majority of text is informational in
nature. Researchers have suggested that informational text is more difficult than
narrative text for students to comprehend. In fact, according to Conderman and Elf
(2007) the same students who can read chapter books at grade level, cannot
independently understand the written text found in informational sources including
textbooks, trade books and informational magazines. The reading skills and strategies
are different than those applied to narrative texts. As Van den Broek (2010) suggests,
texts, specifically science text, differs from narrative because it requires different
demands on working memory, comprehension strategies and the use of background
knowledge.
Moving from the process to the materials of learning, informational text is a large
component to teaching content area subjects, and such texts are endowed with
characteristics that are unique from narrative texts. In the following section I first
examine the nature of informational text and then investigate current use of
informational text in the primary grades. In addition, I look at the benefits of using
informational text, specifically in combination with the use of interactive read-alouds.
Accordingly, literacy experts (e.g., Pearson et al., 2010) cite that a major barrier
to effective science instruction is the poor quality of texts available for science
instruction. The nature of scientific text can be challenging for students (Van de Broek,
2010; Conderman & Elf, 2007) because of its organizational structure and its
inconsiderate style such as including an abundant amount of information and assuming
26
too much prior knowledge (Armbuster & Anderson, 1988; Adaiano & Turner, 2002). In
addition, there is often a large amount of irrelevant information (Adaiano & Turner,
2002).
Other factors contributing to the difficulty and complexity of informational text
is its organization of text, and its “low-cohesion” nature (Robinson, Katayama, Beth
Hsieh & Vanderveen, 2006; Best, Rowe, Ozuru, & McNamera, 2005). Low-cohesion
text can be defined as text that presents too much information with too little detail,
utilizing loosely connected statements and poor integration or connectedness with
previous sections of the text (O’Reilly & McNamara, 2007). Informational text is also
challenging because content is unfamiliar to readers. The ideas are presented using
complex, abstract relationships in comparison to simple sequence of events found in
narrative text (Williams, Hall, Lauer, Stafford, DeSisto, & deCani, 2005). With the
complexity of this genre, researchers have suggested that early exposure to informational
text can benefit students in later years.
Informational text in the primary grades. Incorporating informational text is
not an option but a necessity for teachers of primary students. By the time students reach
sixth grade, 75% of their reading will be from informational texts (Moss, 2005). In
addition, many of their assessments by grade four will require them to understand and
comprehend informational text. For example, The National Assessment of Educational
Progress, which assesses students’ reading achievement in grades 3-8, 50% of the grade
four test contained informational text (Moss, 2005).
27
It is evident that students need early exposure to informational text to help them
prepare for later grade levels. Duke (2000) brought awareness to the educational
community on the importance of informational text as well as the scarcity of
informational text in the primary grades. In her landmark study that shed light on the
country’s use of instructional text in the primary grades, she investigated the time spent
with informational text and found only 3.6 minutes was the average time spent per day
on this genre. Jeong, Gaffney & Choi (2010) extended Duke’s study with grades 2-4.
They found consistent results with one minute spent on instructional text in grade 1 with
an increase to only 16 minutes in grades 3 and 4.
In addition, in an earlier survey conducted by Pressley, Rankin and Yokoi
(1996), they examined the type of instructional materials for reading used by teachers
who were nominated for promoting literacy. Only 6% of their classroom reading
materials was informational in nature while 73% were narrative in nature. Unfortunately,
the results have shown this practice to negatively affect students by providing little or no
exposure to informational text (Duke, 2003). It has been suggested that the scarcity of
informational text may be associated with the decline in reading achievement after third
grade (Ness, 2011; Chall, Jacobs & Baldwin, 1990). This decline has also been referred
to as the “fourth-grade slump” (Jeong, Gaffney, Choi, 2010). Around fourth grade, there
is an increase of informational text and some fourth graders are unprepared to
comprehend this informational text and experience a decrease in reading achievement
(Ness, 2011). With this evidence, there is a strong need for primary teachers to
incorporate informational text in their curriculum. Not only has the use of informational
28
text been shown to help students cognitively, it has been shown to help students’
motivation, as is described in the next section.
Motivation and engagement. One of the key goals in selecting text is capturing
the attention of its readers (Saul & Dieckman, 2005). Informational text has been shown
to help motivate students including struggling readers because it capitalizes on children’s
curiosity and interests about the world (Duke, 2000). Morrow, Pressley, Smith and
Smith (1997) directly examined the impact on incorporating informational literature into
science instruction. They interviewed students who were taught either by traditional
standards using science textbooks without the use of informational literature and
students who were taught science using informational literature (trade books). Of
relevance to this study, students who had traditional instruction reported disliking
science and found instruction boring. In contrast, students who were taught science using
informational literature (trade books) reported enjoying science. This finding reinforces
the concept that using informational text including trade books can help motivate
students in science.
Informational Interactive Read-Alouds
Researchers have also embraced the positive impact of trade books (in contrast to
textbooks) and have combined this literature genre with interactive read-alouds which
provides promising effects on students learning science concepts. I will examine the
findings in the next section. Recently, Heisey & Kucan (2010) examined the use of
informational interactive read-alouds on first and second grade students in learning
science concepts. The purpose of this study was to see if there was a difference between
29
students who were engaged in a teacher-led discussion during a read-aloud and students
who were engaged in discussion after read-alouds. The findings showed that students
who participated in the teacher-led discussion during the read-aloud performed
significantly higher than students who participated in the teacher led discussions after
the read-aloud. They also had higher gains from the pre-test time point to the post-test
time point. Similar results were found in an earlier study conducted by Oyler (1996) in
her investigation of first grade students and their interaction with teacher read-alouds of
science informational text. She concluded that students benefitted from the process by
sharing personal connections and asking questions to clarify their own understanding. In
addition, students shared their “expertise” of their newly acquired knowledge. As shown
the use of informational interactive read-alouds can be a powerful vehicle in students’
learning of science concepts.
Graphic Organizers
Another promising instructional practice in teaching science concepts is the use
of graphic organizers (Asan, 2007; Anderson & Huang, 1989; Jang, 2010). In the next
section I present the background behind graphic organizers, examine recent studies on
this instructional tool and specifically investigate the use of a specific type of graphic
organizer, concept maps. Known by a variety of terms, including adjunct displays,
advanced organizers, knowledge maps and story maps, graphic organizers has been
defined as an instructional tool to help students organize concepts (Kim, Vaughn,
Wanzek & Wei, 2004). Its visual and spatial design elements including lines, arrows and
spatial organization highlight key concepts that help facilitate learning (Kim, et al.,
30
2004). Graphic organizers come in a variety of format designs including semantic maps,
venn diagrams, concept maps and semantic feature analysis. Cognitive psychologist,
Ausubel (1963) created this tool to assist students in their use of expository text
(Robinson, Katayama, Beth, Hsieh, and Vanderveen, 2006).
Background history of graphic organizers. Ausubel has been considered the
originator of designing and using graphic organizers. Ausubel proposed that a learner’s
existing knowledge or cognitive structure influences his or her learning (Kim, Vaughn,
Wanzek, & Wei, 2004). Furthermore, learning takes place by the assimilation of new
concepts, expanding and strengthening the cognitive structure (Novak & Canas, 2006;
Kim et al., 2004). To help in this process, graphic organizers provide a framework for
relating existing knowledge to new information (Ausubel, 1963; Kim et al., 2004).
Researchers (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002; McCrudden, Schraw, & Lehman, 2009;
Alvermann and Boothby, 1983) have used this visual tool on helping students in content
area literacy, and I summarize two pertinent studies below.
DiCecco & Gleason (2002) examined the use of graphic organizers with middle
school students identified as learning disabled. Students were assigned to either an
experimental group (using a graphic organizer) or a comparison group (without the use
of a graphic organizer). Students in the experimental group completed a partial graphic
organizer after reading social studies text. Participants in the comparison group read the
same text but without the use of a graphic organizer. The intervention lasted twenty
days. They found that participants using the graphic organizer had higher relational
31
knowledge as assessed by a written measurement designed by the researchers by
including more relational statements.
Similar results were found with a study conducted by McCrudden, Schraw and
Lehman (2009) in which they examined the use of cause-and-effect relationships using
adjunct displays (causal diagram), a type of graphic organizer, on science text
comprehension with undergraduate students. The undergraduate students were
undergraduate majors from a western university. Approximately 64% were juniors,
while 8% were sophomores and 28% were seniors. Students were assigned to one of
three conditions: diagram (adjunct display), list (outline) or text-only. After reading the
text, students in the diagram condition studied a completed adjunct display created by
the researchers. This adjunct display showed the cause and effect sequence of kidney
stone formation. Participants in the list condition studied a completed outline created by
the researchers while students in the text-only condition reread the text. Students were
then administered assessments. The researchers reported the participants who used the
adjunct display answered more problem-solving transfer items correctly and answered
more question about transitive relationships about cause-and-effect than participants in
the other two groups. Furthermore, students in the list (outline) group also answered
more problem-solving transfer items correctly and answered more questions about
transitive relations about cause-and-effect than participants in the text-only group. This
reinforces the notion that graphic organizers can be an effective tool in aiding students in
their learning.
32
Concept Mapping
As previously mentioned, there are a variety of graphic organizers that have been
shown to aide in learning. Concept maps have gained attention in its use of helping
students learning science concepts.
As an extension of the graphic organizer, Novak designed the concept map as a
tool to show students’ understanding and meaning of science concepts and prepositions
(Novak & Canas, 2006). The main goal of this graphical tool is to organize and represent
knowledge (Novak & Canas, 2008). In using a concept map, a teacher selects a certain
topic to be mapped (Novak & Gowin, 1984). The students have an opportunity to
identify their own key concepts. Then students draw lines to connect and show
relationships between the concepts. Linking words or phrases are used to define these
connections. For example if making a concept map on soil, the linking word “are”
would connect “soil” to “layers of soil”. Or the phrase “is made up of” can be used to
connect “soil” to “broken parts of rocks”. The use of concept mapping can be a
promising strategy for promoting reading comprehension of informational text. An
advantage to concept mapping is that it can be used as a pre-reading, during reading
and/or a post reading activity (Oliver, 2009).
Alvermann and Boothby (1983) conducted a study with fourth grade students
using concept maps in learning social studies informational text. Students were assigned
to either an experimental condition, using concept maps or to a comparison condition
without the use of concept maps. Students in the experimental condition were shown a
partially-constructed concept map created by the researchers. Participants were told to
33
study the graphic organizer and to remember as many details as they could. Then the
participants read the social studies passage. Participants in the comparison condition
reread the passage without being shown a graphic organizer. Then, both groups were
assessed. The researchers reported that the students using the concept mapping had a
higher retention of key ideas than students who did not use a concept map as measured
by written recall. The written recall was scored by two independent judges.
Assan (2007) found similar results with his examination of the use of concept
mapping on fifth grade science students. Students were assigned to either an
experimental group using a concept map or a comparison group without the use of
concept map. Both groups covered the same material as outlined in the class textbook.
In addition to covering the same instructional material as the comparison group, using
Inspiration, a computer-based program created by Helfgott and Westhaver in 1987,
students in the experimental group constructed individual concept maps with concepts
from a class list created during discussion. After a five-day instructional period, students
were assessed. The researchers reported that participants in the experimental group
recalled more key ideas than the participants in the comparison group as measured by a
multiple-choice assessment. These studies reinforce the use of concept mapping as a tool
for learning science concepts, especially in recalling key ideas and relational knowledge.
Theoretical Background of Concept Mapping
There have been several cognitive theories explaining the effectiveness of
concept mapping on learning. These theories include: cognitive-load theory; dual coding
34
theory; and visual argument. I will examine these theories starting with cognitive load
theory.
Cognitive load theory. Cognitive load theory suggests that working capacity is
limited and stresses that optimum learning occurs when working memory is kept to a
minimum (Sweller, 2006; Leslie, Low, Jin & Sweller, 2011). According to Sweller
(2006), cognitive load is composed of three components: intrinsic load, extraneous load,
and germane load (Leslie et al., 2011). Intrinsic load refers to the difficulty of the
content to be learned and cannot be altered except by changing what is to be learned or
increasing the expertise or knowledge of the learners (Leslie et al, 2011; Sweller, 1993).
Extraneous load refers to the cognitive load induced by the instructional design of the
materials presented (Sweller, 1993). Germane load refers to the cognitive load caused by
“effortful” learning due to working memory resources required to deal with intrinsic
load (Sweller, 1993). Instructional procedures should strive to decrease cognitive load to
allow more working memory to deal with intrinsic load (Sweller, 1993; Leslie et al,
2011). Researchers have suggested that the use of graphic organizers such as concept
mapping can help in managing intrinsic load by reducing extraneous load and increasing
germane load through its organization of concepts in a cohesive design providing space
for the working memory to learn new information (Vekiri, 2002).
Consistent with this theory was a study conducted by Stull and Mayer (2007).
This study compared the use of author-constructed graphic organizers with the use of
learner-created graphic organizers on college students learning biology concepts from
informational text. This study focused on the ongoing debate between the activity theory
35
and the cognitive load theory on the effectiveness of student learning. They concluded
that students using the author-created graphic organizers performed higher on a transfer
test than students who constructed a graphic organizer after reading informational text.
This study is aligned with the cognitive load theory because the graphic representations
of information allowed the learner to engage in generative processing while not having
to engage in extraneous processing (Stull & Mayer, 2007).
Dual coding theory. Another cognitive theory that has been associated with
graphic organizers is dual coding theory (Vekiri, 2002). Paivio posits that in the dual
coding theory, cognition involves the activity of separate subsystems, a verbal system
specifically for dealing with language and a nonverbal system specifically for dealing
with nonlinguistic information (Paivio, 2006). These systems consist of representational
units, logogens and imagens that are activated when an individual recognizes or thinks
about words or things (Vekiri, 2002; Paivio, 2006). According to this theory, the verbal
and nonverbal systems are both associated with language. But the two systems process
visual and verbal information separately (Vekiri, 2002).
According to Paivio (2006) illustrations and other visual representations such as
graphic organization may benefit instruction by providing an opportunity for learners to
store information in two forms of memory representation, linguistic and visual (Vekiri,
2002). This may also provide learners with two modes to memorize information (Paivio,
2006). Another advantage to learning, Paivio suggests in regards to dual coding theory,
is that learners are more likely to remember concrete than abstract information (Vekiri,
2002). In addition, visual and verbal units are processed differently. Visual information,
36
referred to as imagens are processed simultaneously while verbal units are processed
serially (Vekiri, 2002).
Consistent with this theory is a study conducted by Purnell & Solman (1991) in
which they investigated high school students learning technical material. There were
three groups in this study. Group one was given a passage that contained text with an
illustration. In group two, the original text was the passage was rewritten so that it had
the same information as the illustration but with no illustration. Group three was given
the same rewritten passage as group two as well as an illustration (content of the
illustration was repeated through both text and illustration). Participants were given five
minutes to read their passage. After five minutes, the passages were taken up by the
researchers and assessed. They found that students who studied information with text
with related illustrations (group three) outperformed students in content measures.
According to the researchers, comprehension may have been higher for this group in
associated with dual coding theory because the number of memory codes available as
well as the interconnections formed between verbal and nonverbal units resulted in
better recall of content.
Visual Argument Theory. A third cognitive theory that has been associated
with the use of concept maps is the Visual Argument Theory. This theory proposes
graphical representations communicate information more effectively than text reducing
the learner’s cognitive effort while interpreting the information (Tzeng, 2010; Robinson
& Kiewra, 1995; Vekiri, 2002). This theory posits that using graphical representations
such as concept maps can increase computational efficiency. By placing concepts close
37
together, it allows the learner to locate information easily reducing cognitive effort
(Vekiri, 2002). By using a graphic organizer such as concept mapping, Robinson &
Kiewra (1995) stresses “it can heighten reader awareness of conceptual relations or text
structure better than text alone” (p. 97).
Consistent with this theory was a study conducted by Winn (1991) in which he
reported that using graphical representations of tree diagrams were more effective in
aiding students in identifying inferences about relationships between concepts. Similar
results were found by a study conducted by Robinson and Kiewra (1995) in which they
examined the use of graphic organizers, outlines, and text-alone on undergraduates in
learning educational psychology concepts. Students were assigned to one of the three
conditions: graphic organizers, outlines, or text-alone. In the study, students studied
either text with graphic organizers, text with outlines or text-alone. One day later,
students reviewed their respective materials for 15 minutes and were assessed. They
reported that the participants who studied the text with the graphic organizers performed
significantly higher in measures that assessed hierarchical and coordinate relations as
measure by written essays than participants in the other conditions.
In conclusion, the use of graphic organizers specifically concept maps can be
advantageous in teaching science concepts. Several theories including visual argument,
dual coding theory and cognitive load theory have explained the additive effects of
graphic organizers on learning concepts especially in the area of science.
38
Conclusion
In this literature review, we examined a variety of educational topics. First I
reviewed the importance of integrating science and reading as well as implementation
barriers. Then we examined the use of interactive read-alouds and its impact on learning.
Next, I reviewed recent research on informational text. Lastly, I examined the use of
graphic organizers, specifically concept maps on learning.
Therefore, each instructional practice studied in the literature review has been
proven to be beneficial to learning. However, little or no research has combined these
instructional practices to examine its effect on students’ learning of science concepts.
39
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Study
The following empirical evidence has been shown to help students in reading and
science: the integration of reading and science (Pearson, Moje, & Greenleaf, 2010;
Reveles & Brown, 2008; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008); informational text (Palmer &
Stewart, 2003; Saul & Dieckman, 2005; Smolkin & Donovan, 2003); interactive
informational read-alouds (Heisey & Kucan, 2010; Smolkin & Donovan, 2003; Fisher,
Flood, Lapp & Frey, 2004; Smolkin, McTigue, Donovan, & Coleman, 2008);
questioning (Heisey & Kucan, 2010; Lloyd, 2004; Fisher, Flood, Lapp & Frey, 2004);
comprehension questioning with writing (Harvey, 1998); and concept mapping (Oliver,
2009; Novak & Gowin, 1984; Schmid & Telaro, 1990). But little or no research has
combined these methods to examine its affect on students’ learning, or more specifically
look at the type of learning that these methods benefit. This study compared the degree
of learning that occurred when using the comprehension strategy techniques using
interactive read-alouds of informational trade books with either one of the following
additional instructional practices: a) concept mapping or b) using comprehension
questions (teacher-generated). The types of learning that were measured were: a)
relational thinking as measured by a relational vocabulary assessment; b) identification
of key concepts as measured by a multiple-choice assessment; c) individual word
knowledge as measured by a matching vocabulary assessment; and d) relational
40
thinking, students’ ability to retain and recall key information and student’s ability to use
domain knowledge as measured by a written assessment. These were measured by four
comprehension measures: a multiple-choice test; a matching vocabulary test; a relational
vocabulary test; and a writing assessment.
Participants
Third grade students from four comparably-grouped heterogeneous selfcontained classroom participated in this study. Classes were academically balanced by a
grouping procedure conducted by the teachers at the end of the prior academic year.
Students’ reading levels were assessed using the Developmental Reading Assessment
(2005) used to determine their placement in the following categories: “high” (students
who read at a reading level higher than 30); “high-average (students who read at a level
30); average (students who read at a level 28); low-average (students who read at a level
24); and below average (students who read below a 24). The students were equally
distributed among the five categories. Then teachers selected a set number from each
category to make a balanced class. For example, if each class had approximately fifteen
students, then the teacher should have three from each of the five categories. Recent
assessments of students’ text levels validated that the classes were balanced. The classes
were self-contained in which they had the same teacher for all subjects.
The 58 participants (total number in the four classrooms) were enrolled in an
urban area elementary school, located near a major metropolitan area in the southwestern
United States which serves a range of low–income and middle-income neighborhoods.
Demographically this school was comprised of 49.3% Hispanic; 41.2% African-
41
American; 7.7% White; 1.5% American Indian; 0.3% Economically Disadvantaged, as
measured by participation in the federal criteria (i.e., using income requirements) freelunch program was 75.6% and Limited English Proficiency, as measured by students
who score below benchmark in English Proficiency Assessments was 29.8%. There were
29 participants in the concept mapping group and 29 participants in the comparison
group.
Parent permission for student participation was obtained through a parent
permission form. Students had to return the form signed by a guardian/parent in order to
participate. An informational letter that included basic information about the study was
given to all potential participants. There was also a section for parents to agree for their
student to be videotaped during the study. The participants were students who returned
their consent forms. All students who were asked to participate brought back their signed
permission forms and participated in this study.
The school participated in a partnership with a local university. Through this
program, participating schools sent teachers to weekly workshops to learn instructional
science methods. The trainings were taught by university instructors. Approximately one
teacher from each campus was chosen to participate. By participating, the school was
given access to a web-based program that contained lesson ideas, assessments, and
resources for teachers and staff to utilize. All the resources were aligned with state
standards. Select measures developed by the university partnership were used in this
study. The university involved with this partnership conducted a study with fifth grade
students at this school investigating the effectiveness of their program on students’
42
learning of science concepts. The current study and the study conducted by the
university did not involve the same students.
Grouping Assignment
There were two treatments in this study. In the concept mapping intervention,
students participated in interactive informational read-alouds preceded and followed by
concept mapping activities. The second treatment was the comparison intervention, in
which students participated in interactive informational read-alouds preceded by a
comprehension questioning with a writing activity in which students responded in
writing to comprehension questions. Intact classes received one of two interventions/
treatments. The length of both interventions was the same.
A ten- item multiple-choice test was administered to the students a week prior to
the study. This test assessed the students’ background knowledge related to the topic of
“soil”. Average scores for background knowledge on the multiple-choice test were
calculated for each class. The four classes were then sorted into two groups – lower and
higher background knowledge. One class from each group (high and low) was
randomly assigned to the concept mapping group. The remaining two classes were
assigned to the comparison group.
Timeline
Parents received consent letters that contained information about the study, their
child’s role in the study and permission to participate and were returned within 4 days.
The letters are available in Appendix A. The guest teacher received training two onehour sessions on consecutive days one week before the treatment began. During this
43
time period, she also had an opportunity to practice both concept mapping (for the
concept mapping classrooms) and administering writing with comprehension questions
(for the comparison classrooms) in a field classroom in the same school with feedback
from the trainer. On November 23rd all participants were given a pre-test over the
formation of soil, as previously discussed. Based on the results of the multiple-choice
pre-test, classes were assigned to conditions. During November 30th to December 9th,
the guest teacher delivered lessons using interactive informational read-alouds over the
formation of soil. The concept mapping group participated in a concept mapping
exercise before and after the interactive informational read-aloud. The comparison group
participated in a comprehension questioning with writing activity also before and after
the interactive informational read-alouds. On December 10th, all participants were
assessed in an immediate post-test using the same format of assessments as the pretest:
relational vocabulary, multiple-choice, matching vocabulary, and a written assessment
(responding on questions). On December 15th students were assessed using a delayed
post-test with its format the same as the pretest and immediate post-test using the same
four types of assessments. These assessments are thoroughly discussed in the assessment
section of this chapter. Table 2 lists the timeline for the study.
44
Table 2
Timeline for Study
Dates
November 18th
November 22nd, 23rd
November 23rd
November 30th-December 9th
December 10th
December 15th
Action
Parent Informational & Consent Letters
Sent Home and Received by November
22nd
Teacher Training
Pre-test over Formation of Soil
Instructional Lessons delivered by guest
teacher to both concept mapping and
comparison groups
Immediate Post-test
Delayed Post-test
45
Materials
Selection of books for interactive informational read-alouds. The use of
informational interactive read-alouds has been shown to be advantageous in learning
information including in science (Smolkin & Donovan, 2003; Heisey & Kucan, 2010).
As discussed earlier in the literature review, using an interactive informational type of
read-aloud invites students to interact, share connections, ask questions and share their
own ideas (Smolkin & Donovan, 2003). Based on the recommendations of the National
Science Teachers Association (NSTA), books were identified for possible use in the
study. To make the final selection of books to be used for this study, a meeting was held
with the school’s science instructional coach, literacy instructional coach, and four third
grade science teachers to make the final selection. Selection criteria included vocabulary
and content and illustrations of the books. For vocabulary criteria, selection was based
on the use of content-related words. For content and illustrations criteria, selection was
based on the accurate depictions of content and illustrations.
The books were read in their entirety within a single class session and are listed
within Table 3. If the treatment procedures exceeded the limits of the class period, they
were completed on the next day, prior to the introduction of the next trade book in the
planned sequence of lessons.
46
Table 3
Informational Interactive Text Set for the Read-alouds
Title
Author
Date &
Topic
Vocabulary Terms to be
Publisher
Content
Introduced
Sand and
Beth
Crabtree
Overview of
• Soil
Soil: Earth’s Gurney
(2004)
soil:
• Sand
Building
Composition
• Nutrients
Blocks
of soil; Types
• Sand formation
of soil layers;
• Organisms in
Soil Scientists
Soil
Without Soil
Ashley
Chase &
Marco
Bravo
Dirt
Nancy
Goodman
Delta
EducationDeveloped
at the
Lawrence
Hall of
Science and
Graduate
School of
Education at
the
University
of Cal at
Berkeley
(2007)
National
Geographic
Society
(2007)
Discussed the
importance of
soil
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Earthworm
Vitamins
Shelter
Predator
Protect
Root
Isopod
Discusses
dirt; How
does the
Earth help
things grow;
Who lives in
dirt
•
•
•
•
•
Dirt
Humus
Silt
Clay
Decomposers
47
Table 3 Continued
Title
Author
Soil Erosion
and How to
Prevent It
Natalie
Hyde
Date &
Publisher
Crabtree
(2010)
Topic
Content
Discusses
weathering;
how
individuals
can prevent
soil erosion
Vocabulary Terms to be
Introduced
• Erosion
• Weathering
• Sediment
• Global Warming
Erosion
Becky
Olien
Coughlan
(2001)
Types of
Erosion;
Natural
Landmarks;
Helping fight
erosion
•
•
•
•
Wind Erosion
Ice Erosion
Soil Erosion
Conservation
Minerals
Rebecca
Faulkner
HeinemanRaintree
(2007)
Wiggling
Worms at
Work
Wendy
Pfeffer
Harper
Collins
(2003)
Explains how
minerals
form; Types
of minerals
How worms
interact with
Earth; how
worms help
plants and
soil
•
•
•
•
•
•
Minerals
Elements
Atoms
Properties
Cocoon
Burrows
Composting:
Nature’s
Recyclers
Michael
Koontz
Picture
Window
Books
(2002)
Overview of
composting
•
•
•
•
•
•
Composting
Compost
Decompose
Decomposers
Bacteria
Fungi
48
Elmo P10 digital visual presenters/document camera. Elmo P10 Digital
Visual Presenters/Document cameras were standard for every classroom in the district.
The document camera function was employed in this study during the interactive
informational read-alouds. This allowed all students to see the book and the text along
with the guest teacher as well as view the illustrations. This tool is a mounted camera
attached to a digital projector. To use this tool, the teacher placed a book face up on the
flat surface and the images were projected onto a large screen.
Assessments
Participants in both the concept mapping group and comparison group were
assessed using a pre-test, post-test and delayed post-test procedure. The assessments
consisted of the following: a multiple-choice, a vocabulary matching test, a relational
vocabulary test, and a written assessment. The measures included both written and oral
modalities and were designed so that the influence of word decoding skills was
minimized. The reason for multiple assessments was to measure different types of
learning which will be further discussed in the next section. Table 4 lists the type of test
that will be used for pre-test, post-test and delayed post-test.
49
Table 4
Assessments
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Delayed Post-Test
Time Students
have to Complete
Test
a) Multiple-Choice
a) Multiple-Choice
a) Multiple-Choice
15 Minutes
b) Matching
Vocabulary Test
b) Matching
Vocabulary Test
b) Matching
Vocabulary Test
15 Minutes
c) Relational
Vocabulary Test
(oral)
c) Relational
Vocabulary Test
(oral)
c) Relational
Vocabulary Test
(oral)
15 Minutes
d) Writing
Assessment
d) Writing
Assessment
d) Writing
Assessment
15 Minutes
Multiple-choice test. This 10-item test assessed key ideas, explicit information
and indirectly assessed students’ vocabulary knowledge. Using a multiple-choice
format, student had four answer choices to choose from for each question. The teacher
read-aloud the questions and answer choices for each question. The students were given
fifteen minutes to complete. A copy of this assessment can be found in Appendix B.
Matching vocabulary test. The matching vocabulary test consisted of ten terms
and thirteen definitions. Participants matched key terms with their definitions. For
example, “soil” would be matched with the definition “consisting of layers that are made
of parts of rock”. The teacher read-aloud the terms and answer choices. This assessed
individual vocabulary word learning. The students were given fifteen minutes to
complete. A copy of this assessment can be found in Appendix B.
50
Relational vocabulary test. In this assessment task, participants were given
three related terms and they had to provide an explanation as how these were related. For
example, in the terms “humus, topsoil, subsoil”, the explanation would be that they are
all layers of soil”. This assessment was administered individually in an oral format that
was administered by the researcher which allowed for query of answers. The students
did not see the words. This format was modeled on the Relational Vocabulary test from
the “Test of Oral Language Development, Intermediate, Edition 4” (Newcomer &
Hammil, 2008). There were ten items in this assessment. The students were given fifteen
minutes to complete. A copy of this assessment can be accessed in Appendix B.
Writing assessment. Another type of assessment commonly used to assess
comprehension is writing (Montelongo, Herter, Ansaldo, Hatter, 2010; Klein, 2000;
DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). The purpose of a writing assessment was to assess students’
conceptual thinking, retaining and recalling information and how students use domain
knowledge (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). The essay prompt was on the following two
questions: 1) “If you were able to play in a large pile of dirt, or soil, what kind would
you like best?” and 2) “Write about why you can do certain things with sandy soil”. It
required an explanatory response. The essay prompts were given in a standardized
method using a script to ensure there is consistency for all groups. Students were given
fifteen minutes to respond to the prompt. Blind scoring procedures were used by
removing any identifiable information of the student participant including name or his or
her teacher’s name. A rubric from the university partnership (discussed earlier) was used
to assess the writing assessments (see Appendix B). The scoring of the writing
51
assessments was modeled after the state writing assessment scoring system in which
students’ writing are scored from a one (lowest) to a four (highest). If a student received
a “one”, then he or she was given 25 points. If a student received a “two”, then he or she
was given 50 points. If a student was given a “three”, then he or she was given 75 points.
Lastly, if a student received a “four”, then he or she was given 100 points.
Reliability of assessments. It is imperative to check for reliability of the
assessments when conducting a data analysis. Reliability means that the assessment
should consistently reflect the construct it is measuring (Fields, 2005; Fields & Hole,
2003). An effective way to check for reliability is to use split-half reliability which
randomly divides the data set into two (Fields, 2005). Then, a score for each participant
is calculated based on each half of the scale. If the scale is reliable, the participant’s
score on one half of the scale should be similar to the score on the other half creating a
perfect correlation (Fields, 2005). Though a problem with this method is that there are
multiple ways that data can be divided which can result in different results (Salkind,
2000). Cronbach created a measure to help improve this method referred to as
Cronbach’s alpha (Salkind, 2000; Fields & Hole, 2003; Fields, 2005). Cronbach
recommended dividing the data in every possible way and then finding the correlation
for each division (Dugard, Todman, & Staines, 2010; Fields & Hole, 2003). Cronbach’s
alpha procedure was used to establish inter-item reliability. According to Nunnally
(1978) .70 and higher is acceptable. The inter-item reliability scores for the multiplechoice assessment were the following: .77 for the pretest; .91 for the post-test; and .86
for the delayed post-test. The inter-item reliability scores for the matching vocabulary
52
test were the following: .72 for the pretest; .89 for the post-test; and .81 for the delayed
post-test. The inter-item reliability scores for the relational vocabulary test were the
following: .71 for the pretest; .87 for the post-test; and .77 for the delayed post-test.
Training scorers of relationship scoring for writing assessment. Two scorers,
the school’s science instructional coach and the literacy instructional coach, were trained
in the relationship scoring procedure. During the training, five essays were scored using
a rubric from the university partnership (discussed earlier) to assess inter-rater reliability.
The essays were written by students who did not participate in the study. The inter-rater
reliability for the five essays was 100%.
Pilot study. In order to assess the reliability of the assessments, a pilot study
(N=19) was conducted with a class of 3rd grade students from the same school district as
the study participants. The participants in the pilot study were assessed with the same
pre-tests as the students in the study. There was not a significant difference between the
performance of the students in the pilot study and the performance of the students in the
study in all four assessments (relational vocabulary, multiple-choice, matching
vocabulary, writing assessment).
53
Guest teacher. All instructional lessons were taught by a guest teacher for both
the concept mapping and the comparison groups. The guest teacher was the school’s
instructional science coach. The use of a guest teacher minimized “teacher effects” by
ensuring that varying levels of teacher experience, quality, or education were held
constant throughout the study. She was unaware which classes were included in the
treatment group and which classes were included in the comparison group.
The guest teacher has been teaching for nine years prior to this academic year.
She has taught three years in fourth grade and four years in fifth grade. She has taught
math and science in both grade levels and has held the position as science coach for two
previous years. She holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Interdisciplinary Studies. She has
continued to further her science education knowledge through continuing credit hours at
a local community college. As a science instructional coach, she met with classroom
teachers on a regular basis discussing instructional strategies, and curriculum topics.
Instructional procedures. Participants in both groups were instructed during
eight consecutive daily lessons. All lessons were 45 minutes long and focused on
concepts associated with soil presented in the selected trade books. A new, but related,
concept was introduced each day (see Table 5).
54
Table 5
Concepts for Each Day
Day
Concept
1
Soil
2
Soil Formation
3
Dirt
4
Erosion
5
Types of Erosions
6
Minerals
7
Composting
8
Decomposers
Table 6 lists the components of each daily lesson. Each lesson was structured
around four activities: “pre-reading”, “vocabulary introduction”, “interactive
informational read-aloud”, and post-reading”. The following chart provides descriptions
of each activity.
55
Table 6
Lessons for Day 1
Day 1
Activity
Pre-Reading
Concept mapping Group
Lesson /Concept
Introduction: Soil
Comparison Group
Lesson /Concept
Introduction: Soil
Concept Mapping
Students wrote terms on
index cards associated with
“soil”.
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students wrote on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
soil.
If a student did not write a
word during the first
minute, the teacher used a
prompt. For example the
teacher may say, “Write
down any word or words
that come to your mind
when you hear the word
soil”.
The teacher gave the
directions.
She stated, “What do you
know about soil?” Please
write in sentence format.
There is not a required
length. Please write as
much as you can”.
The cards were placed on
the front board next to the
word “soil”.
Lines connected terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
concept of “soil formation”.
The writing with
comprehension questions
was collected by the teacher
for data collection purposes.
56
Table 6 Continued
Activity
Vocabulary Introduction
Concept mapping Group
Comparison Group
Teacher introduced vocabulary selected from text that
were used in the interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Soil, sand, nutrients, sand formation, organisms found in
soil
Interactive Informational
Read-aloud: Sand & Soil:
Earth’s Building Blocks
Prediction:
Teacher showed the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera.
Students had an opportunity to share what they thought the
book was about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher read pgs. 1-20.
During –Reading Questions:
The teacher asked the following questions:
1. What is the difference between sand and soil?
2. Is there more than one type of soil?
Reading of Text:
Teacher finished the book.
After-Reading Questions:
1. What was the author’s purpose in writing this
book?
57
Table 6: Continued
Activity
Post-Reading Activities
Concept mapping Group
Comparison Group
Class Constructed
Comprehension Question
Concept Mapping
with Writing Activity
Student had an
The teacher asked the
opportunity to add to
following questions
the class concept map.
taken from the text used
The teacher asked the
in the
students if there are any
Interactive
additions or changes to
informational readthe concept map. If so,
aloud:
students had an
“Why is soil
opportunity to add
important?”
words or make
“What are the different
suggestions for changes.
types of soil?”
Pre-Generated Concept
Mapping
Students were given a
pre-generated concept
map that was 90%
completed by the
researcher. The teacher
gave directions and
called out the words in
the word bank and the
words found in the
visual diagrams.
The teacher informed
the students that the
maps (class constructed
concept map and the
pre-generated concept
map) may look different
because they may have
different words.
The students spent 5
minutes writing on
answering these
questions independently
on their piece of paper.
Writing was collected
for data collection
purposes.
58
Answering Protocols
When students are asked questions, the teacher used an answering protocol.
When a student responded with an incorrect answer, the teacher asked the student to
clarify or explain their justification for their answer. If a student failed to give a plausible
response, the teacher asked for a volunteer to help answer the question. If the student
responded with a correct answer, the student had to justify their answer. Then, the
teacher continued on to the next question.
Defining the Activities
The following section will describe each activity that is listed in the table above.
Activities are listed and are sub-categorized by “concept mapping” and “comparison”
groups.
Pre-reading. In this phase, the teacher introduced the concept of the day to both
the concept mapping group and the comparison group. The concept mapping and
comparison group participated in different pre-reading activities which are listed below.
Concept Mapping Group
Class created concept maps. Participants in the concept mapping group created
a class concept map as group with the teacher. The first one, created on Day 1, centered
on the concept of “soil” and was displayed on a wall in the classroom for the entire unit.
Starting on Day 2, a new map was created each day focusing on the specific concept for
the day (see Table 5). As previously discussed these concepts were terms associated with
“soil”. Each day students were given two index cards. The teacher stated the concept of
59
the day. Then, students were given an opportunity to write words associated with the
concept.
For example, on the fourth day, the concept was “erosion”. Students
brainstormed words that were related to “erosion”. If students had difficulty with the
word “erosion”, then the teacher would define the word and use it an example. For
example, the teacher may say, “Erosion is the wearing away of Earth’s soil resources. A
word that comes to mind when I think of the word “erosion” is “ice” because it is a type
of “erosion”. So I will write the word “ice” on my index card.” After approximately
three minutes, the teacher called on students who wanted to share the words they have
written. In order to be chosen, students had to raise their hands. The teacher would
select a student, who would share his or her word that is associated with “erosion”. Then
the student was asked how it related to the concept. If the student failed to justify his or
her answer, then the teacher would call on another student to help him or her. If the
word was an acceptable answer, such as “weathering”, then the teacher would place the
card (with the correct answer) in the proper relationship to the index card “erosion”.
Next, the teacher would explain how concept maps show relationships by using
“connecting words” between the concept and term(s) associated with the concept. For
example, if the student chose “wind erosion”. The connecting words would be “type of”
for the concept term of “erosion”. So the teacher would draw a line connecting “wind
erosion” to “erosion” and will write “type of” on the line. This took approximately 8
minutes. The teacher stopped the activity after 8 minutes had passed or five words have
60
been added. Each day, to document progress, the researcher would take a picture of the
class created concept map during the pre-reading phase.
Comparison Group
Comprehension questioning with writing. Participants in the comparison group
participated in a comprehension questioning with writing activity. The students were
given three minutes to write everything they know about the concept for the day. For
example, on Day 4, students responded to the following question, “What do you know
about erosion?” They wrote their response on a sheet of paper that was collected daily
for data collection purposes.
Interactive Informational Read-alouds
The concept mapping and comparison group participated in the same format of
interactive informational read-alouds. This activity included using the same text and the
same questions posed by the teacher before-, during-, and -after reading. Video-taping
was used to check for fidelity.
Each instructional day, a new informational trade book was read to the students.
The teacher showed the cover, table of contents and title using the Elmo document
camera. Then students predicted what they thought the book was about. Then the
teacher read a specific number of pages (see Table of Procedures in Appendix D).
During the interactive informational read-aloud, students were encouraged to engage in
discussion about the text through questioning and making connections (Smolkin &
Donovan, 2001). After reading the predetermined number of pages, the teacher stopped
and asked questions that were related to the text. The teacher gave the students an
61
opportunity to share their responses. Then the teacher read the rest of the book. Then
after reading the text, the teacher asked additional questions related to the text. Students
were be given a chance to respond to the questions.
Post Reading Activities
Concept mapping. There were two different types of concept maps. The first
was a class created concept map that was used as both a pre-reading and post-reading
activity. The second was a pre-generated concept map that was used as a post-reading
activity. The pre-generated concept map had a predetermined group of words and
phrases listed in a word bank. Both are briefly discussed in the following section.
Concept Mapping
Class created concept mapping. After participating in the interactive
informational read- aloud, the students had an opportunity to make additions, and/or
modifications the class created concept map that was started as a pre-reading activity. If
a student wanted to add a word, then the teacher gave him or her index card and he or
she wrote the word and found its location on the class concept map. Then they drew a
line to show its connection and wrote in the connecting words. Pictures of the class
created concept map were taken after the post-reading phase for data collection
purposes.
Pre-generated concept mapping. After participating in the class concept map
graphic organizer, participants in the concept mapping group were given a sheet that
contained a pre-generated concept map with a word bank. Following the theory of
gradual release of responsibility (Pearson & Gallager, 1983), in which responsibility
62
shifts from the teacher to the students, the complexity of the task increased between
lessons. On the first two days, the concept map was 90% completed with graphic visuals
of circles drawn and the text supplied. On day 3 & 4, it was 75% completed. On Days
5& 6, it was 50% completed and on Day 7 & 8, it was only 25% completed. For
example, on Day 3, students had to fill out 25% of the concept map. The words were
provided a word bank below the concept map. Students could use the class created
concept map on the board as a resource.
Comparison
Comprehension questioning with writing. Students in the comparison group
participated in a comprehension questioning with writing activity. The students were
given a sheet of paper. The teacher wrote a question on the front board. The question
was derived from the text that was used in the interactive informational read-aloud and
highlighted explicit learning. Using the categorization of questioning posed by Raphael
(1984) in QAR, these were “right there” questions. “Right there” questions are located in
a single place in the text. As Raphael (1984) suggest words in the question are often
“right there” the same sentence. Then the teacher read the question(s) aloud to the
students. The students had five minutes to answer the question in writing. The writing
pieces were collected by the teacher for data collection purposes.
Day One for Concept Mapping and Comparison Group
The next section is an in-depth view of Day One for both the concept mapping
and comparison groups. The teacher followed the answering protocol discussed earlier in
the chapter. Scripted pieces in the next section are for example purposes only. These
63
were used for the purpose of training the guest teacher. However, for the actual
instruction, the teacher was not expected to follow the wording of a script.
Procedures for concept mapping group. The guest teacher had the following
materials ready prior to the lesson: index cards, marker, and the book: Sand and Soil:
Earth’s Building Blocks. The teacher wrote the following on the white board in front of
the classroom: soil, sand, nutrients, sand formation and organisms in soil. The teacher
welcomed the students and informed them that they would be starting a unit on the
formation of soil. Then the teacher passed out index cards. The teacher asked them to
brainstorm words that reminded them of the term “soil”. The students had 3 minutes to
write one word or phrase associated with “soil”. The teacher wrote the word “soil” on an
index card and placed it on the center of the board using a magnet. Then, the teacher
asked for students to raise their hand if they wanted to share their words that they wrote.
The teacher called on a student that has his or her hand raised who then shared his or her
response. Refer to the section on answering protocols.
Then, the teacher explained how concept maps are used to show connections. “In
using concept maps we use lines to show our connections. So I will place your index
card to the right of the word “soil”. The teacher took the index card from the student
and placed it in reference to the word soil. Then the teacher stated, “Then I will draw a
line to show its connection”. The teacher used a marker to draw a straight line
connecting the word soil to the word “ground”. The teacher continued, “The next thing
that we need to do is write how it is connected. So what word should we use to show
the connection? ”The soil ____ground”. The students responded with the word “is”.
64
Then, the teacher stated, “So we would write the word “is” to show the connection”.
Then the teacher wrote the word “is” on the line that she drew connecting “soil” and
“ground”. This eliminated students using words that are not associated with soil such as
“car” or “candy”.
Students continued sharing their words. The teacher placed the cards on the
board. The student had to draw the connection using “linking verbs” to identify the
relationship. After a total of ten minutes passed, (approximately five examples) the
teacher stopped the activity.
Vocabulary introduction. The teacher read the words on the board that she had
written before the lesson started. These words (or phrases) were found in the book that
they read. The following words were: soil, sand, nutrients, sand formation, and
organisms in soil. The teacher read the words aloud to the students. Then the teacher had
the students repeat the words. The teachers informed the students to listen for these
words or phrases when they participated in the read-aloud.
Interactive informational read-aloud. Then the teacher started an interactive
informational read-aloud using the book Sand and Soil: Earth’s Building Blocks by Beth
Gurney (2005). The teacher introduced the book. She then prompted the students to
make a prediction about what they think the book will be about.
“Looking at the pictures and the title, what do you think this book will be about?” The
teacher placed the book on the Elmo document camera and showed the front cover. Then
she pointed at the title. Then she showed the students the cover page and the table of
contents. As she pointed to each section, she read the words aloud to the students. For
65
each page, the teacher paused approximately 5 seconds. The teacher called on volunteers
to raise their hand who wanted to share what they thought the book was about. Then the
teacher called on a student who raised his or her hand. The student responded, “I think it
is about sand and soil and maybe lizards”. The teacher responded, “Explain why you
think the book will be about sand, soil and lizards”. The student stated, “Well the title
is Sand and soil and there is a lizard on the cover”. The teacher responded, “Good
observations. Would anybody else like to share their predictions?”. The teacher called
on another student. The student responded, “I think it will be about sand and soil too”.
The teacher responded, “Let’s read and find out”.
The teacher read pages 4-11. During the read-aloud, students were given the
opportunity to ask questions and make connections by raising their hand. After reading
page 11 the teacher stopped and asked questions about the text.
She then asked, “Can somebody raise their hand and tell me what the term soil
means?” Then, the teacher called on a student who had their hand raised. The student
shared their response with the class. The student responded, “Soil is important to plants.
They help them grow”. The teacher responded, “You are right. Would anybody else
like to add anything?”. The teacher called on another student. The student responded,
“Soil is found on the ground and has roots”. The teacher responded, “You are correct.
Soil is found in the ground and it has roots that are connected to the plants”.
Then, the teacher asked another question. “Would somebody like to raise their
hand and answer this question: Is there more than one type of soil? The teacher called
on a student that had his or her hand raised. The student responded, “Yes, there are sand
66
and silt”. The teacher responded, “Correct, there are more than one type of soil. Sand
and silt are two types. Can somebody name the other type of soil?”. The teacher called
on another student. The student responded “clay”. The teacher responded, “Good job.
Yes, clay is another type of soil. So clay, sand and silt are all different types of soil.”
Then the teacher continued the informational read-aloud. The teacher read the
rest of the book. After the read-aloud, the teacher asked additional questions to have
students think deeper about the text.
The teacher then asked “Can somebody raise their hand and tell the class the
author’s purpose in writing this book?” The teacher selected a student that has his or
her hand raised. The student shared his or her response. The student responded, “They
wrote the book to tell us about soil”. The teacher responded, “Correct, authors write
informational books to help us learn about different types of topics. Would anybody
else like to add anything?” The teacher calls on another student. The student
responded, “The author wanted us to know that soil was important for things to grow”.
The teacher responded, “Yes, you are correct. The author explained how soil is
essential to plants”.
After calling on two students, the teacher continued to the next question. Can
somebody raise their hand and share why soil is important to the Earth? The teacher
called on a student that had his or her hand raised. The student responded, “Soil helps
plants that have food we eat grow”. The teacher responded, “Soil does help plants.
What types of plants contain food that we eat?”. The students responded, “Tomatoes,
and corn”. The teacher responded, “Yes, tomatoes and corn both need soil to help
67
them grow. What animals eat plants that we rely on everyday?” The teacher selected a
student. The student responded, “Cows. They give us milk and hamburgers are made
from them”. The teacher responded, “Good thinking. Yes, cows eat plant products. So
soil impacts us in the way because if they do not have enough food to eat, then they
will not be able to produce milk or survive to provide meat such as hamburgers or
steaks”.
Post-Reading. The students had an opportunity to add and/or modify the class
created concept map. “Would somebody like to raise their hand and share any topics
that we should add to our concept map? The teacher called on three students. The
students gave their responses and then wrote the words on the index cards. For example,
Hannah stated “organisms of soil”. Then, she wrote the word down on the index card.
Then the teacher asked “Where should we put the card? The teacher called on a student.
Student responded to the left or right (any direction is acceptable). Then teacher asked
“What connecting word or words should we use to show a relationship? The teacher
selected a student to respond.
Then the students had an opportunity to work on a pre-generated concept map.
The teacher passed out copies of pre-generated concept maps. Students were given an
opportunity to complete the pre-generated concept map using a word bank.
This activity took ten minutes, and then the teacher ended the lesson and let the
students know that they will continue their study on the formation of soil the next day.
68
Procedures for Comparison Group
The teacher had the following materials ready: marker, and the book: Sand and
Soil: Earth’s Building Blocks. The teacher wrote the following on the white board in
front of the classroom: soil, sand, nutrients, sand formation, and organisms in soil.
These words were used in the vocabulary introduction. The teacher welcomed the
students and informed them that they would be starting a unit on the formation of soil.
Then, the teacher passed out a sheet of paper to every student. Then students did a
comprehension questioning activity with writing for three minutes. In this quick write,
students wrote as much as they knew about soil.
Vocabulary instruction. The teachers read the words on the board. These words
were found in the book that they read. The following words were: soil, sand, nutrients,
sand formation, and organisms in soil. Then the teacher had the students repeat the
words. The teacher informed the students to listen for these words when they
participated in the read-aloud.
Interactive informational read-aloud. Then the teacher moved into an
informational interactive read-aloud using the book Sand and Soil: Earth’s Building
Blocks by Beth Gurney. The teacher introduced the book. She then prompted the
students to make a prediction about what they thought the book would be about.
“Looking at the pictures and the title, what do you think this book will be about?”
The teacher placed the book on the Elmo document camera and showed the front cover.
Then she pointed at the title. Then she showed the students the following pages in this
order: cover page, and the table of contents. The teacher paused for five seconds for each
69
page. The teacher called on volunteers who raised their hand who wanted to share what
they thought the book was about. Then the teacher called on a student who raised his or
her hand.
After students had been given an opportunity to share ideas and predictions, the
teacher started the interactive informational read-aloud. The teacher read pages 4-11.
After reading page 11 teacher stopped and asked questions about the text.
She then asked, “Can somebody raise their hand and tell me what the term soil
means?” Then, the teacher called on a student who had their hand raised. Then, the
teacher asked the second question. “Would somebody like to raise their hand and
answer this question? Is there more than one type of soil? The teacher called on a
student with his or her hand raised.
Then the teacher continued the interactive informational read-aloud. The teacher
read the rest of the book. After the read-aloud, the teacher asked several questions to
have students think deeper about the text.
The teacher asked “Can somebody raise their hand and tell the class the
author’s purpose in writing this book?” The teacher called on a student that had his or
her hand raised. Then, the teacher asked, “Can somebody raise their hand and share
why soil is important to the Earth?” The teacher called on a student with his or her hand
raised.
Post-reading activity. The teacher started the post-reading activity of answering
comprehension questions using writing. These questions were from the book that was
used in the interactive informational read-aloud. The teacher wrote the two questions on
70
the front board. Then she passed out a piece of paper to each student. Then the teacher
read the questions to the students.
“I want to write as much as you can about the following questions. You will have 5
minutes to write:
1. Why is soil important?
2. What are the characteristics of soil?”
The students had five minutes to write. After five minutes, the teacher collected the
students’ written responses. Then the teacher let the students know that they would
continue their study on the formation of soil the next day.
Fidelity Measures
Video-taping. All lessons were video-taped. The purpose of the video recording
was to provide a fidelity measure between the two conditions and among the different
classrooms within the treatment condition. The students were familiar with the use of
videotaping of instruction due to the district’s National Teaching Certification Program
which required teacher candidates to videotape their lessons. In addition, the use of
videotaping was used for staff development purposes on a regular basis.
A checklist was created aligned with the teacher script to ensure teacher fidelity
of both treatment and comparison instruction. A copy of the checklist can be found in
Appendix C. The checklist was used during the lesson by the researcher as well as
during the viewing of videotapes of the lessons. The school’s literacy coach was trained
in the relationship scoring procedure. During the training, two checklists were scored to
assess inter-rater reliability. The inter-rater reliability was 100%. If there was
71
disagreement on the checklists, there was discussion between the disputed scores. The
checklists indicated that fidelity was maintained between the concept mapping group and
the comparison group.
Teacher Training
Training of the guest teacher took place over two days. Instruction on how to
implement concept maps and writing with questioning was discussed shared. The guest
teacher had the opportunity to practice to ensure understanding of the implementation of
procedures. She utilized both the concept map graphic organizer and questioning with
writing activity on a group of fourth grade students to practice after the second day of
training. She was observed and evaluated to ensure she was implementing the concept
mapping and administering a question with writing activity effectively and with fidelity.
Feedback was also given.
Research Questions
The following are the research questions used in this study:
a). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ performance on a test of relational vocabulary?
b). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ ability to identify key ideas on a multiple-choice test?
c). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
72
mapping facilitate students’ individual word knowledge as measured by a vocabulary
matching test?
d). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ clarity of written expression as measured by a holistically
scored writing test?
Data was analyzed using a mixed-ANOVA model to analyze both within-factors
(repeated measure), to show growth, and between-factors, to determine differences
between the two groups (Fields, 2005). The significance level was set at .05, a priori.
This was analyzed to determine the effect of the activities on different types of learning.
Significance of the Study
The impact of the study can have implications for future research. Data obtained
from this study may show how concept mapping and/or writing affect students’ types of
learning. This information can be used to increase teacher knowledge about how
students learn best. This can have implications for staff development for schools and
universities.
73
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Analysis of Data
Data was analyzed using a mixed-ANOVA model to analyze both within-factors
(repeated measure), to show growth within groups, and between-factors, to determine
differences between the two groups (Fields, 2005). The significance level was set at .05,
a priori. There were four types of assessments administered to participants: a) a
relational vocabulary assessment; b) a matching vocabulary assessment; c) a multiplechoice assessment; and d) a writing assessment. A brief description of the four
assessments is shown below.
Confidence intervals. In order to assess the accuracy of the sample mean as an
estimate of the mean in a population, it is imperative to calculate the boundaries within
which we think the true value of the mean will fall (Fields, 2005). For this study, 95%
confidence intervals were calculated. This means that 95% of the time, the true value of
the population mean will be within the upper and lower boundaries (Fields, 2005; Fields
& Hole, 2003). If the interval is small, then most likely the sample mean is close to the
true mean (Fields, 2005; Fields & Hole, 2003). In contrast, if the confidence interval is
large, then the sample mean could be very different than true mean (Fields, 2005; Fields
& Hole, 2003).
Fidelity of checklist and inter-rater reliability. A checklist was created
aligned with the teacher script to ensure teacher fidelity of both treatment and
comparison instruction. A copy of the checklist can be found in Appendix C. The
74
checklist was used during the lesson by the researcher as well as during the viewing of
videotapes of the lessons. The school’s literacy coach was trained in the relationship
scoring procedure. During the training, two checklists were scored to assess inter-rater
reliability. The inter-rater reliability was 100%. The checklists indicated that fidelity was
maintained between the concept mapping group and the comparison group. There was
not a significant difference in fidelity between the concept mapping group and the
comparison group. For the concept mapping group, 97% of the lessons covered the items
in the checklist. For the comparison group, 98% of the lessons covered the items in the
checklist.
Relational Vocabulary Assessment
The purpose of this assessment was to assess students’ relational vocabulary
knowledge. Participants were given three related terms and had to provide an
explanation of how they were related. It was given individually in an oral format which
allowed the examiner to query for ambiguous answers.
Multiple-Choice Assessment
This assessment assessed key ideas, explicit information and indirectly assessed
students’ vocabulary knowledge regarding soil formation. Following a multiple-choice
format, students were given four answer choices to choose from for each question. There
were ten questions for students to complete.
75
Matching Vocabulary Assessment
The purpose of the matching vocabulary assessment was to assess individual
vocabulary word learning. The students were given ten vocabulary terms and fourteen
definitions. Students were to correctly pair the vocabulary term to its correct definition.
Writing Assessment
The purpose of the writing assessment was to assess students’ conceptual
thinking, retaining and recalling information as well as how students use domain
knowledge (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). The essay prompt was on the following two
questions: 1) “If you were able to play in a large pile of dirt, soil, what kind would you
like best?” and 2) “Write about why you can do certain things with sandy soil”. Students
were given fifteen minutes to respond to the writing prompts.
Assumptions. As previously stated, this study used a mixed model, repeated
measures-ANOVA to analyze both within-groups factors as well as between-groups
factors. In ANOVA analysis, it is imperative to have homogeneity of variances between
conditions when analyzing data (Field, 2005). Sphericity is a condition of compound
symmetry which holds true when both the variances across conditions are equal, also
referred to as homogeneity of variance assumption. To measure sphericity, one can take
each pair of treatment levels scores and calculate the differences between each pair of
scores to determine equality of variances. Using SPSS, the program uses the Mauchly’s
Test to check for the equivalences of variances. If the tests are not significant (i.e.,
having a probability of less than .05), the F-ratio can be reported as “sphericity assumed”
(Heck, Thomas, & Tabata, 2010; Fields, 2005).
76
If there is not equality of variances, then one has “violated sphericity”. The effect
of violating sphericity is a loss of power, increasing the probability of a Type II error
because the test statistic, F-ratio, simply cannot be assumed to have an F-distribution
(Fields & Hole, 2003). Type II errors occur when a test fails to reject a false null
hypothesis (Heck, Thomas, Tabata, 2010). If sphericity is violated, then there are
corrections that can be applied to produce a valid F-ratio. SPSS uses the GreenhouseGeisser correction and the Huynh-Feldt correction (Fields & Hole, 2003). GreenhouseGeisser is recommended to be applied when sphericity estimates are less than .75
(Fields, 2005). When sphericity estimates are greater than .75, then it is recommended to
use the Huynh-Feldt correction (Fields, 2005). Another option when violating sphericity
is to use a multivariate approach (MANOVA) because they are not dependent upon the
assumptions of sphericity (Heck, et al., 2010; Fields, 2005).
I will present the results individually by outcome measures in the order of the
following: relational vocabulary, multiple-choice, matching vocabulary and writing.
Then for each outcome measure, I will present the data analysis in the following order:
means, between-factor analysis and within-factor analysis. In addition to measures of
significance, I will also report effect sizes in the form of partial eta squared.
Relational Vocabulary
Mean scores. The mean scores and standard deviations for both the concept
mapping (i.e., experimental) and comparison group were computed for the pre-test, posttest and delayed post-test and are summarized in Table 7.
77
Table 7
Mean Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for the
Relational Vocabulary Assessment
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Delayed Post-Test
SD
M
Group
N
M
SD
M
Concept Mapping
29
9.31
6.50
93.80
9.03
88.97
Comparison
29
10.00
5.98
82.76 14.12
77.24
SD_________
7.24
11.30 ______
The confidence intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison
group for the Relational Vocabulary at the different time-points (pre-test, post-test and
delayed post-test) are summarized in Table 8.
78
Table 8
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for
the Relational Vocabulary Assessment
Pre-Test
Group
95% CI
Post-Test
95% CI
Delayed Post-Test
95% CI___
Concept Mapping
[6.99, 11.64]
[89.39, 98.20]
[85.43, 92.50]
Comparison
[7.68, 12.32]
[78.35, 87.17]
[73.52, 80.77]
The mean scores and confidence intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and
the Comparison Group for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment are displayed in
Figure 1.
79
100
90
95% Confidence Intervals
80
70
60
50
Concept Mapping
40
Comparison
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Delayed
Time-Points
Figure1. Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison Group at Different
Time-Points for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment.
Between-Factors Analysis for Relational Vocabulary
The purpose of the between-factors analysis was to determine if there was a
significant difference between the performance of the concept mapping group and the
performance of the comparison group. I first performed an overall ANOVA and then
follow-up tests using the Sidak procedure to determine at which time-points the two
groups differed. Regarding sphericity, the Mauchly’s Test for this analysis was not
significant, W=.953, χ ²(2)=2.632, p=.268, therefore I assumed sphericity which meant
80
that the variances were equivalent. In other words, the difference between variances of
the conditions was not significantly different (Field, 2005).
Between-factors effect. There was an overall significant difference between the
concept mapping and comparison group, F(1, 56) =11.28, p=.001; Partial
2
=.168. The
between-factors effect for the relational vocabulary assessment is summarized in Table
9.
Table 9
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
ρ
Partial 2
Source
df
MS
F
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intercept
1
633620.69
3034.80
<.001
.982
Groups
1
2354.02
11.28
.001
.168
Error
56
208.79
_______________________________________________________________________
Mean differences between-factors. Next, in order to determine if there was a
difference between the concept mapping and comparison group at each time-point, I
analyzed the between-factors at each time point. The two groups did not differ
significantly at the pre-test time-point. At the post-test time-point, the concept mapping
group scored higher (p =.001) than the comparison group by 11.03 points. At the
delayed post-test time-point, the concept mapping group again scored higher (p=<.001)
than the comparison group by 11.72 points.
81
Within-Factor Analysis of Relational Vocabulary
In a repeated-measure model, as stated earlier, within-factors were analyzed
because the same individuals participated in all conditions (Fields, 2005). In this study,
within-factors were analyzed to determine if there was a significant difference between
the different time-points (pre-test to post-test; pre-test to delayed post-test; and post testto delayed post-test). In other words, in this study, the within factor analysis measured
the extent of learning, or growth, over time within each group.
Analysis of variance. I computed an analysis of variance to determine if there
was an overall difference of the assessment scores at different time-points. The results
are summarized in table 10 and documented that there was a significant difference in the
scores across time-points, F(2, 112) =3689.65, ρ=<.001. There was also a significant
interaction between the groups and time-points, F(2, 112) =23.22, ρ=<.001. There was
also a significant between group (concept mapping and teacher questioning) by within
group ( pre-test, post-test, delayed post-test) interaction. Figure 2 indicates that the
effects of concept mapping and teacher questioning had impacted the test performances
differently on the post test and delayed post tests. As can be seen in Figure 2, the lines
indicating the initial rates of learning between the pre-test and the post test were not
parallel, indicating indicating that the slope of the line segment was steeper between the
relevant time-points showing a higher learning rate for the concept mapping treatment
group, as indicated by the non parallel (slightly divergent) lines representing the
changes for the two groups between the pre and post tests. As indicated by the nearly
parallel lines between the post test and delayed post test mean scores, both groups
82
experienced a similar decline in mean test performances between the post test and the
delayed post test of the relational vocabulary assessment.
Table 10
Analysis of Variance for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment
Effect
MS
df
F
ρ
_______________________________________________________________________
Time
112158.62
2
3689.65
<.001
Time x
Groups
705.75
2
23.22
<.001
Error
30.40
112
_______________________________________________________________________
The interaction between the groups and the time-points is graphically represented
in Figure 2 for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment.
83
Figure 2. Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time
Time-Point
Points for
Relational Vocabulary Assessment.
Follow up analyse
analyses. Next, to determine if there were differences across the
time-points
points for each group individually (comparison and concept mapping) follow-up
follow
pairwise comparisons, using the Sidak procedure, were run and results are summarized
in Table 11. Significant differences were found between each time-point
point comparison. It
is important to note that forr both groups, the difference in scores was in a positive
direction between the pre-test
test and post
post-test time-point
point comparison and between the prepre
84
test and delayed–post test time-point comparison, but in the negative direction between
post-test and delayed post test time-point comparison.
Table 11
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Relational Vocabulary Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
Group
Time Point
Concept mapping
Pre-Test
Post-Test
84.48
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
79.66
<.001
Post-Test
Delayed Post
-4.83
<.002
Pre-Test
Post-Test
72.76
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
67.24
<.001
Post-Test
Delayed Post
-5.52
<.001_____
Comparison
____________
Compare
Mean Difference
ρ______
85
Multiple-Choice
Mean scores. The mean scores and standard deviations for both the concept
mapping (i.e., experimental) and comparison group were computed for the pre-test, posttest and delayed post-test and are summarized in Table 12.
Table 12
Mean Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for the
Multiple-Choice Assessment
Pre-Test
Post-Test
M
SD
M
Concept mapping 29
43.79
13.47
90.00 10.00
86.20
Comparison
43.48
14.21
78.97 13.98
71.04 16.11_
Group
N
29
SD
Delayed Post-Test
M
SD__
11.15
The confidence intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and Comparison Group
for the Multiple-Choice Assessment at the different time-points (pre-test, post-test,
delayed post-test) are displayed in Table 13.
Table 13
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for
the Multiple-Choice Assessment
Group
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Delayed Post-Test
95% CI
95% CI
95% CI_____
Concept mapping
[38.64, 48.94]
[85.48, 94.52]
[81.05, 91.36]
Comparison
[38.30, 48.60]
[74.45, 83.49]
[65.88, 76.19]
86
The mean scores and confidence intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and
the Comparison Group for the Multiple-Choice Assessment are graphically displayed in
Figure 3.
100
90
95% Confidence Intervals
80
70
60
50
Concept Mapping
40
Comparison
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Delayed
Time-Points
Figure 3. Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison Group at
Different Time-Points for the Multiple-Choice Assessment.
Between-Factors Analysis for Multiple-Choice Assessment
The purpose of the between-factors analysis was to determine if there was a
significant difference between the performance of the concept mapping group and the
performance of the comparison group. I first performed an overall ANOVA and then
follow-up tests using the Sidak procedure to determine at which time-points the two
87
groups differed. Regarding sphericity, the Mauchly’s Test for this analysis was not
significant, W=.920, χ ²(2)=4.606, p=.100, therefore I assumed sphericity.
Between-factors effect. There was an overall significant difference between the
concept mapping and comparison group, F(1, 56) =7.15, p=.010; Partial
2
=.113. The
between-factors effect for the multiple-choice assessment is summarized in Table 14.
Table 14
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Multiple-Choice Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
Source
df
MS
F
ρ
Partial 2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intercept
1
826207.47
1733.84
<.001
.969
Groups
1
2209.20
7.15
.010
.113
Error
56
476.52
_______________________________________________________________________
Mean differences between-factors. Next, in order to determine if there was a
difference between the concept mapping and comparison group at each time point, I
analyzed the between-factors at each time point. The two groups did not differ
significantly at the pre-test time-point. At the post-test time-point, the concept mapping
group scored higher (p=.001) than the comparison group by 11.03 points. At the delayed
post-test time-point, the concept mapping group again scored higher (p=<.001) than the
comparison group by 15.17 points.
88
Within-Factor Analysis for Multiple-Choice Assessment
Analysis of variance. Next, analysis of variance was analyzed to determine if
there was an overall difference of the assessment scores at different time-points. The
results are summarized in Table 15. It indicates that there was a significant difference in
the scores across time-points, F(2, 112) =1031.77, ρ=<.001. There was also a significant
interaction between the groups and time-points, F(2, 112) =30.93, ρ=<.001. There was
also a significant between group (concept mapping and teacher questioning) by within
group ( pre-test, post-test, delayed post-test) interaction. Figure 4 indicates that the
effects of concept mapping and teacher questioning had impacted the test performances
differently on the post test and delayed post tests. As can be seen in Figure 4, the lines
indicating the initial rates of learning between the pre-test and the post test were not
parallel, indicating that the slope of the line segment was steeper between the relevant
time-points showing a higher learning rate for the concept mapping treatment group, as
indicated by the non parallel (slightly divergent) lines representing the changes for the
two groups between the pre and post tests. As indicated by the nearly parallel lines
between the post test and delayed post test mean scores, both groups experienced a
similar decline in mean test performances between the post test and the delayed post test
of the multiple-choice assessment.
89
Table 15
Analysis of Variance on the Multiple-Choice Assessment
Effect
MS
df
F
ρ
_______________________________________________________________________
Time
28314.37
2
1031.77
<.001
Time x
Groups
848.85
2
30.93
<.001
Error
27.44
112
_______________________________________________________________________
The interaction between the groups and the time-points are graphically shown in
Figure 4 for the Multiple-Choice Assessment.
90
Figure 4. Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time
Time-Points
Points for
Multiple-Choice
Choice Assessment
Assessment.
Follow up analyse
analyses. Next, to determine if there were differences across the
time-points
points for each group individually (comparison and concept mapping) follow-up
follow
pairwise comparisons, using the Sidak procedure were run and results are summarized in
Table 16. Significance was found between each time
time-point comparison.
omparison. Again, it is
important to note that for both groups, the difference was in a positive direction between
the pre-test and post-test
test time
time-point comparison and between the pre-test
test and delayed
91
post-test time point comparison, but in the negative direction between post-test and
delayed post-test time point comparison.
Table 16
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Multiple-Choice Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
Group
Time Point
Concept Mapping
Pre-Test
Post-Test
46.21
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
42.41
<.001
Post-Test
Delayed Post
-3.79
.008
Pre-Test
Post-Test
35.52
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
27.59
<.001
Delayed Post
-7.93
<.001__
Comparison
__________________Post-Test
Compare
Mean Difference
ρ___ _
92
Matching Vocabulary
Mean scores. The mean scores and standard deviations for both the concept
mapping (i.e., experimental) and comparison group were computed for the pre-test, posttest and delayed post-test and are summarized in Table 17.
Table 17
Means Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for the
Matching Vocabulary Assessment
Pre-Test
Group
N
M
SD
Concept mapping 29
17.59
13.54
Comparison
18.28
14.90
29
Post-Test
M
SD
Delayed Post-Test
M
SD__
84.14 13.50
81.03
14.23
79.66 18.42
73.45
18.18
The confidence intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison
Group for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment at the different time-points (pre-test,
post-test, delayed post-test) are displayed in Table 18.
Table 18
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for
the Matching Vocabulary Assessment
Group
Pre-Test
95% CI
Post-Test
95% CI
Delayed Post-Test
95% CI___
Concept mapping
[12.36, 22.81]
[78.13, 90.14]
[74.96, 87.11]
Comparison
[12.99, 23.57]
[73.65, 85.66]
[67.38, 79.52]
93
The mean scores and confidence intervals for the individual groups are
graphically displayed in Figure 5 for the matching vocabulary assessment.
100
90
95% Confidence Intervals
80
70
60
50
Concept Mapping
40
Comparison
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Delayed
Time-Points
Figure 5. Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison Group at
Different Time-Points for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment.
94
Between-Factors Analysis for Matching Vocabulary
The purpose of the between-factors analysis was to determine if there was a
significant difference between the performance of the concept mapping group and the
performance of the comparison group. I first performed an overall ANOVA and then
follow-up tests using the Sidak procedure to determine which time-points the two groups
differed. Mauchly’s test indicated that the assumption of sphericity had been violated (χ
²(2)=12.28, p=.002); therefore degrees of freedom were corrected using Huynh-Feldt
estimates of sphericity (εhf=.871). Field (2005) recommends that when estimates of
sphericity are greater than .75 then the Huynh-Feldt correction should be used.
Between-factors effect. There was not an overall significant difference between
2
the concept mapping and comparison group, F(1, 56) =1.02, p=.316; Partial
=.018.
The between-factors effect for the matching vocabulary assessment is summarized in
Table 19.
Table 19
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
Source
df
MS
F
ρ
Partial
2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intercept
1
606166.09
989.43
.000
.946
Groups
1
625.86
1.02
.316
.018
Error
56
612.64
______________________________________________________________________
95
Mean differences between-factors. Next, in order to determine if there was a
difference between the concept mapping and comparison group at each time-point, I
analyzed the between-factors at each time point. The two groups did not differ
significantly at the pre-test time-point. At the post-test time-point, the concept mapping
group scored higher (p=.295) than the control group by 4.48 points. At the delayed posttest time-point, the concept mapping group again scored higher (ρ=.082) by 7.50 points.
But this difference could be due to chance.
Within-Factor Analysis for Matching Vocabulary
Analysis of variance. Next, analysis of variance was analyzed to determine if
there was an overall difference within groups of the assessment scores at different timepoints. The results are summarized in Table 20. It indicates that there was a significant
difference in the scores across time-points, F(1.74, 97.56) =1259, ρ=<.001. There was
also a significant interaction between the groups and time-points, F(1.74, 97.56) =4.33,
ρ=.020. There was also a significant between group (concept mapping and teacher
questioning) by within group ( pre-test, post-test, delayed post-test) interaction. Figure 6
indicates that the effects of concept mapping and teacher questioning had impacted the
test performances differently on the post test and delayed post tests. As can be seen in
Figure 6, the lines indicating that the slope of the line segment was steeper between the
relevant time-points showing a higher learning rate for the concept mapping treatment
group, as indicated by the non parallel (slightly divergent) lines representing the
changes for the two groups between the pre and post tests. As indicated by the nearly
parallel lines between the post test and delayed post test mean scores, both groups
96
experienced a similar decline in mean test performances between the post test and the
delayed post test of matching vocabulary.
Table 20
Analysis of Variance for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment
Effect
MS
df
F
ρ
_______________________________________________________________________
Time
84683.59
1.74
1259.25
<.000
Time x
Groups
290.96
1.74
4.33
.020
Error
67.25
97.56
_______________________________________________________________________
The interaction between the groups and the time-points are graphically
represented in Figure 6 for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment.
97
Figure 6. Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time
Time-Points
Points for
Matching Vocabulary Assessment
Assessment.
Follow up analyse
analyses. Next, to determine if there were differences across the
time-points
points for each group individually (comparison and concept mapping) follow-up
follow
pairwise comparisons, using the Sidak procedure were run and results are summarized in
Table 21. Significance was found between each time
time-point
point comparison with the
exception of the time-point
point comparison between the post
post-test
test and the delayed post-test
post
for the concept mapping group. It is important to note that for both groups, the difference
98
was in a positive direction between the pre-test and post-test time-point comparison and
between the pre-test and delayed post-test time-point comparison, but in the negative
direction between post-test and delayed post-test time-point comparison. In addition,
there is a significant difference between the post-test time point and delayed post-test
time point for the comparison group but not for the concept mapping group. This
indicates that the concept mapping group was better able sustain their gain in individual
word learning.
Table 21
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Matching Vocabulary Assessment
______________________________________________________________________
Group
Concept mapping
Comparison
Time Point
Pre-Test
Compare
Post-Test
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
63.45
<.001
Post-Test
Delayed Post
-3.01
.158
Pre-Test
Post-Test
61.38
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
55.17
<.001
Delayed Post
-6.21
__________________Post-Test
Mean Difference
66.55
ρ____
<.001
.001__
99
Writing Assessment
Mean scores. The mean scores and standard deviations for both the concept
mapping (i.e., experimental) and comparison group were computed for the pre-test, posttest and delayed post-test and are summarized in Table 22.
Table 22
Means Scores for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for the
Writing Assessment
Group
N
Pre-Test
M
SD
Post-Test
M
SD
Delayed Post-Test
M
SD _
Concept mapping 29
24.14
8.14
76.72 17.59
74.14
Comparison
25.86
4.64
62.93 25.55
54.31 24.15 __
29
17.01
Table 23 summarizes the confidence intervals for the Concept Mapping Group
and the Comparison Group for the Writing Assessment at the different time-points (pretest, post-test, delayed post-test). The confidence intervals are larger as compared to
other assessments due to the scoring of the writing assessments. The scoring of the
writing assessments were modeled after the state writing assessment scoring system in
which students’ writing are scored from a one (lowest) to a four (highest). If a student
received a “one”, then he or she was given 25 points. If a student received a “two”, then
he or she was given 50 points. If a student was given a “three”, then he or she was given
75 points. Lastly, if a student received a “four”, then he or she was given 100 points.
100
Table 23
Confidence Intervals for the Concept Mapping Group and the Comparison Group for
the Writing Assessment
Pre-Test
Group
95% CI
Post-Test
95% CI
Delayed Post-Test
95% CI
__
Concept mapping
[21.67, 26.60]
[68.57, 84.88]
[66.37, 81.91]
Comparison
[23.40, 28.33]
[54.77, 71.09]
[46.54, 62.08]
Figure 7 graphically displays the mean scores and confidence intervals for the
individual groups for the Writing Assessment.
101
100
90
95% Confidence Intervals
80
70
60
50
Concept Mapping
40
Comparison
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Delayed
Time-Points
Figure 7. Confidence Intervals for Concept Mapping and Comparison Group at
Different Time-points for the Writing Assessment.
Between-Factors Analysis for Writing Assessment
The purpose of the between-factors analysis was to determine if there was a
significant difference between the performance of the concept mapping group and the
performance of the comparison group. I first performed an overall ANOVA and then
follow-up tests using the Sidak procedure to determine at which time-points the two
groups differed. Regarding sphericity, the Mauchly’s Test for this analysis was not
significant, W=.915, χ ²(2)=4.860, p=.080, therefore I assumed sphericity.
102
Between-factors effect. There was an overall significant difference between the
concept mapping and comparison group, F(1, 56) =8.71, p=.005; Partial
2
=.135. The
between-factors effect for the writing assessment is summarized in Table 24.
Table 24
Table of Between-Factors Effect for the Writing Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
Source
df
MS
F
ρ
Partial 2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intercept
1
489084.05
866.09
<.001
.939
Groups
1
4917.39
8.71
.005
.135
Error
56
564.71
_______________________________________________________________________
Mean differences between-factors. Next, in order to determine if there was a
difference between the concept mapping and comparison group at each time-point, I
analyzed the between-factors at each time point. The two groups did not differ
significantly at the pre-test time-point. At the post-test time-point, the concept mapping
group scored higher (ρ=.020) than the comparison group by 13.79 points. At the delayed
post-test time-point, the concept mapping group again scored higher (ρ=.001) than the
comparison group by 19.83 points.
103
Within-Factor Analysis for Writing Assessment
Analysis of variance. Next, analysis of variance was analyzed to determine if
there was an overall difference within groups of the assessment scores at different timepoints. The results are summarized in Table 25. It indicates that there was a significant
difference in the scores across time-points, F(2, 112) =174.47, ρ=<.001. There was also
a significant interaction between the groups and time-points, F(2, 112) =9.04, ρ=<.001.
There was also a significant between group (concept mapping and teacher questioning)
by within group ( pre-test, post-test, delayed post-test) interaction. Figure 8 indicates
that the effects of concept mapping and teacher questioning had impacted the test
performances differently on the post test and delayed post tests. As can be seen in
Figure 8, the lines indicating the initial rates of learning between the pre-test and the post
test were not parallel, indicating that the slope of the line segment was steeper between
the relevant time-points showing a higher learning rate for the concept mapping
treatment group, as indicated by the non parallel (slightly divergent) lines representing
the changes for the two groups between the pre and post tests. Furthermore, the crossing
of the lines between the pre-test and post-test indicate a fairly large interaction (Fields,
2005). As indicated by the nearly parallel lines between the post test and delayed post
test mean scores, both groups experienced a similar decline in mean test performances
between the post test and the delayed post test of the writing assessment. But the
comparison group had a greater decline from post-test to delayed post-test.
104
Table 25
Analysis of Variance for the Writing Assessment
Effect
MS
df
F
ρ
_______________________________________________________________________
Time
34601.29
2
174.47
<.001
Time x
Groups
1792.39
2
9.04
<.001
Error
198.33
112
_______________________________________________________________________
The interaction between groups and time-points is graphically represented in
Figure 8 for the Writing Assessment.
105
Figure 8.. Graph of the Interaction Between the Groups and the Time
Time-Points
Points for Writing
Assessment.
106
Follow up analyses. Next, to determine if there were differences across the
time-points for each group individually (comparison and concept mapping) follow-up
pairwise comparisons, using the Sidak procedure were run and results are summarized in
Table 26. Significance was found between the pre-test and the post test as well as the
pre-test and the delayed post-test. There was no difference between the post-test and
delayed post-test indicating retention of knowledge.
Table 26
Sidak Comparison of Mean Differences for the Concept Mapping Group and the
Comparison Group for the Writing Assessment
_______________________________________________________________________
Group
Concept mapping
Comparison
Time Point
Pre-Test
Compare
Post-Test
Mean Difference
52.59
ρ
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
50.00
<.001
Post-Test
Delayed Post
-2.59
.795
Pre-Test
Post-Test
37.07
<.001
Pre-Test
Delayed Post
28.45
<.001
Delayed Post
-8.62
.023
__________________Post-Test
__
_
107
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this intervention study was to examine and compare the impact of
concept mapping and questioning on students’ organization and retention of science
knowledge when used in conjunction with interactive informational read-alouds for
third-grade students. The use of the following has been shown to benefit science and
reading instruction: frameworks for integrating science and literacy development
(Pearson, et al., 2010); using informational texts (Smolkin, McTigue, Donovan &
Coleman, 2008); using interactive informational read-alouds (Smolkin & Donovan,
2001); and the use of graphic organizers specifically concept maps (Oliver, 2009).
However, limited research has combined these methods to examine its effect on student
learning. Specifically, the present study examined how the use of interactive read-alouds
using informational texts with concept mapping or questioning affect elementary
students’ organization and retention of different types of science knowledge.
The participants in this study consisted of 58 third-grade students assigned to
either a concept mapping group or a comparison group using questioning. The
intervention was over an eight-day instructional time-period. The students were
administered the following pre- and post- assessments: a relational vocabulary
assessment; a multiple-choice assessment; a matching vocabulary assessment; and a
writing assessment at three different time-points (pre-test, post-test, delayed post-test).
108
The results of the study were analyzed using a mixed-ANOVA model to
determine if there were differences between the performances of the concept mapping
group and the comparison group, as well as to see if there was a significant change of the
students’ performance over time within groups as assessed in the pre-test, post-test and
delayed post-test.
This chapter is organized in several sections. First, the summarized results from
the study will be presented. Then, significant findings will be examined and discussed
followed by concluding thoughts. Then, limitations of the study will be revealed
followed by implications for further research.
Research Questions
The following are the research questions used in this study:
a). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ performance on a test of relational vocabulary?
b). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ ability to identify key ideas on a multiple-choice test?
c). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ individual word knowledge as measured by a vocabulary
matching test?
109
d). In association with interactive read-alouds with informational trade books,
to what extent do the instructional procedures of teacher questioning or concept
mapping facilitate students’ clarity of written expression as measured by a holistically
scored writing test?
Conclusion
The concept mapping group and the comparison group (questioning group) both
produced gains in all assessment measures from the pre-test to the post-tests indicating
that both interventions were successful in facilitating learning of the target science
concepts. However, the concept mapping group produced significantly higher gains in
the following assessments: (a) relational vocabulary assessment (measuring relational
knowledge); (b) multiple-choice assessment (measuring students’ ability to identify key
ideas); and (c) writing assessment (measuring students’ relational thinking, students’
ability to retain and recall key information and students’ ability to use domain
knowledge). However, there was no significance found between the concept mapping
group and the comparison group’s performance on the matching vocabulary assessment
(measuring individual word learning). Significant findings from this study are
highlighted in the following sections. In addition, there have been several cognitive
theories associated with the use of graphic organizers in aiding students’ relational
knowledge including (a) cognitive load theory, (b) visual argument and (c) conjoint
retention theory, which I present below to better understand the possible reasons for the
findings (Cooper, 1998; Robinson & Kiewra, 1995; Vekiri, 2002). It is important to note
110
that these theories are not mutually exclusive. I first present the key findings and then
discuss each one in reference to relevant theories and previous research.
Relational Knowledge
Relational knowledge is being able to identify relationships between concepts as
well as how they are related (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). Concept mapping helped
students increase their relational knowledge as measured by the relational vocabulary
assessment. These findings are logical based on the goals of concept mapping. Based on
Ausubelian principles and constructivist ideas, Novak designed the concept map as a
tool to show students’ understanding and meaning of concepts and prepositions in their
own cognitive structure (Novak, 1998; Novak & Gowin, 1984; Novak, 2005;).
Moreover, concept maps have been shown to be beneficial due to its visuospatial
elements. This graphical instructional tool features cross-links that highlight
relationships or links between concepts in different domains of the concept map,
signaling hierarchical relationships (or other types of relationships) that can be
immediately perceived by the student (Novak & Canas, 2006). Finally, I present
previous research that is relevant to this finding starting with cognitive-load theory.
Cognitive load theory. In comparison to text formats, concept mapping allows
learners to perform more semantic processing in visuospatial working memory and avoid
overload in their verbal working memory (Chang & Yang, 2010). In association with
the cognitive load theory, it suggests that the working memory capacity is limited and
stresses that optimum learning occurs when working memory is kept to a minimum
111
(Chang & Yang, 2010; Amadieu, van Gog, Paas, Tricot & Marine, 2009). Concept
mapping helps lessen cognitive load by organizing and grouping concepts, as illustrated
by Novak and Canas (2006) in the following example. If a person is given a list of ten to
twelve letters or numbers to memorize in seconds, the most that will be recalled is five to
nine letters or numbers, but if the letters or numbers can be grouped to form a word-like
unit or number-unit, it can be related to something such a phone number, then ten or
more letters can be recalled. Accordingly, if students are given ten to twelve familiar but
unrelated words to memorize in seconds, most individuals will only be able recall five to
nine words and only two to three if they are unfamiliar words. But if the words are
familiar and can be related to existing or prior knowledge (i.e., cognitive structure),
twelve or more may be recalled. According to Cooper (1998) graphic organizers have
been shown to reduce cognitive load by organizing concepts in a cohesive design which
then providing space for the working memory to learn new information. In summary, the
cognitive load theory explains students’ gains in relational vocabulary by the
visuospatial elements of the concept map by organizing, grouping and displaying
relationships of the science concepts.
Visual argument. A supporting theory similar to cognitive load is the visual
argument theory (Waller, 1981) which suggests that the “visuospatial” properties of
graphical displays such as concept maps are more “computationally efficient” on
students’ learning because patterns and relationships of concepts are easily perceived
without complex cognitive energy (Vekiri, 2002). Robinson and Kiewra (1995)
contributed this theory to their study in which graphic organizers helped students learn
112
hierarchical and coordinate relationships increasing their relational knowledge versus
studying alone. Rather than limited by the constraints of linear texts and verbal
descriptions, concept maps can capitalize on the flexibility of graphical presentations,
which can make it faster to find information. In conclusion, the visual argument would
predict that concept maps facilitated students learning of relational vocabulary because
the visuospatial arrangement of the concept map enables the learner to identify important
relationships by the way the concepts are arranged and connected to one another.
Conjoint retention hypothesis. Originally the conjoint retention hypothesis
theory (Kulhavy, Lee & Caterino, 1985) was used to interpret learning from
geographical maps, but has been recently attributed to the explanation of the facilitative
effects of graphic organizers (Katayama & Robinson, 2000). This theory states that
information contained in a map, or in this case, a semantic map, is encoded in memory in
both a spatial and verbal format. In contrast, text is only encoded in a verbal format
(Kulhavy, et al., 1985). This theory has much overlap with Dual coding Theory (Paivio,
1990; Paivio & Csapo, 1973) which is discussed in the next section. According to
Katayama & Robinson (2000) the maps or graphical representations are encoded in two
formats and are linked in which activating one format leads to the activation of the other
format. As a result, conjointly retained text information is more opt to be retrieved than
text that is encoded only in a verbal format.
As summarized, these cognitive theories support the findings that graphic
organizers can help students in increasing their relational knowledge (Katayama &
Robinson, 2000; Vekiri, 2002). I now present empirical research, which is based on
113
these theories, with similar and contrasting findings to this study. Schmid and Telaro
(1984), examined the use of concept mapping on high school biology students. They
found that students who used student-constructed concept maps outperformed students
in relational knowledge, than students who received traditional instruction without the
use of concept mapping. It is interesting to note, analogous to this current study, students
actively constructed the concept maps. Additionally, the researchers suggested that the
construction of the map was the most important factor for the positive findings because
the use of teacher-constructed graphic organizers mimics rote memorization of concepts
(Schmid & Telaro, 1984). According to Nesbit and Adesope (2006) the translation of
information from text format to a graphical design, such as a concept map, requires the
learner to process meaning or information more deeply than they would by reading text
alone. Additionally, Stice and Alvarez (1987) found similar results with elementary
students. Specifically they found that the instructional use of concept maps improved
students’ performance in conceptual relations (relational knowledge) and patterns of
science. In contrast, the finding of this study is inconsistent with a study conducted by
Griffin, Simmons and Kameenui (1991) in students’ use of graphic organizers did not
yield significant gains in relational knowledge. One possible explanation for these
inconsistent findings is the fact that the experimental and comparison group had very
similar instruction but in a different format (Kim, Vaughn, Wanzek & Wei, 2004). The
experimental group received informational from a graphic organizer, while the
comparison group received the same information in a list format. This leads to
114
inconclusive results and warrants the need for further research since both types of
interventions were visual in nature.
As previously mentioned, relational knowledge is the ability to identify
relationships as well as explain how they are related. The use of concept mapping has
proven by to be a promising instructional tool for increasing relational knowledge, which
is key to understanding scientific concepts as evidenced by this current study as well as
previous studies (Stice & Alvarez, 1987; Schmid & Telaro, 1984).
Recalling Key Ideas
Another second key finding in this study is that the concept mapping group
performed significantly higher than the comparison group in recalling key ideas as
measured by the multiple-choice assessment. These findings are logical due to its
graphical design elements and are consistent with dual coding theory, which suggests
that the use of graphic organizers such as concept maps facilitate in the learning and
recall of concepts (Vekiri, 2002; Robinson, 1998). The research behind this theory has
been proven to be consistent with the findings of this study. This theory is briefly
discussed in the following sections. Next, I will present empirical research which
examined similar questions.
Dual coding theory. There are two different types of representations in longterm memory-verbal and nonverbal. This theory suggests that storing information in two
codes, verbal and nonverbal (e.g., visual), may aide in increasing memory or recall of
that information because it provides two pathways to retrieve it from long-term memory
(Paivio, 1983; Paivio & Csapo, 1973; Vekiri, 2002; Sadoski, 2005). Next, this theory
115
also suggests that the visual representation (concept map) can be accessed as a whole
rather than as separate pieces, as is the case with verbal representations (Vekiri, 2002).
This theory derived from work by Paivio and Csapo (1973) in which they
conducted a series of studies to examine people’s memory of visual and verbal
information. In these studies, participants were asked to memorize lists of words or
sentences as well as pictures depicting concrete concepts and to recall them at a later
time. They found that the participants had a better memory for picture than for words
(Paivio & Csapo, 1973). In addition, Paivio and colleagues found that the exposure to
both words and pictures had additive effects on memory (Paivio & Csapo, 1973). For
example, participants who were shown both words and pictures remembered more words
than participants who only saw words or pictures. This reinforces the notion that pictures
or in the case of this study that graphical representations as used in the concept maps can
improve memory for verbal information (Vekiri, 2002), thus aiding in students’ recall of
key information, which is consistent with the findings in this study. As stated, dual
coding theory can be applied to concept mapping because the graphical organizers uses
visual graphics (shapes) as well as text proving advantageous for memory.
Several studies have previously investigated the effect of graphic organizers on
students’ recall of key ideas (Anderson & Huang, 1989; Alvermann, 1981; DiCecco &
Gleason, 2002). Anderson & Huang (1989) examined the use of concept mapping on
eighth-grade students learning science concepts. Students were taught how to use the
concept mapping technique and utilized this tool in their learning of science. Researchers
determined that concept mapping had a positive impact on learning science concepts.
116
Alvermann (1981) found similar results when examining the use of graphic organizers
on learning from science informational text on tenth grade students. She discovered that
students who used graphic organizers with informational text had better recall of key
concepts than those who did not use graphic organizers. In addition, Alvermann and
Boothby (1983) reported fourth-grade students who used graphic organizers were able to
recall significantly more relevant information over social studies content after reading an
informational text passage as measured by a written assessment.
In contrast, the findings of this study were inconsistent with a study conducted by
DiCecco and Gleason (2002) with a group of middle school students in which they
found that graphic organizers failed to increase students’ recall of social studies
information as measured by content knowledge multiple-choice tests. However, it is
important to note that in DiCecco and Gleason’s study (2002), the participants who used
graphic organizers had scored higher on essays than students who did not use graphic
organizers. Essay scores were indirectly based on the recall of information. As a result,
students’ performance may have been influenced by the type of assessment.
In summary, the use of concept mapping has proven to be an effective tool for
helping students’ recall of key ideas as proven by this current study as well as previous
studies (Alvermann, 1981; Anderson & Huang, 1989). Interestingly, the study conducted
by DiCecco and Gleason (2002) had mixed results. Students who used graphic
organizers failed to perform significantly higher on the multiple-choice assessments
which measured recall of key ideas but did perform significantly higher on a written
assessment that also measured key ideas showing inconsistent findings.
117
Written Expression
Sturm and Rankin-Erickson (2002) stress that writing constitutes a variety of
cognitive skills and processes. In this study, the written assessment tested several skills
indirectly including the previously discussed measures of relational knowledge and
recall of key ideas. However, writing also measured students’ ability to apply their
newly acquired domain knowledge about soil into a coherent essay. Specifically holistic
rubric was scored on these dimensions: a) relational knowledge; and b) identification of
key ideas; and c) organization. The concept mapping group performed significantly
higher on the written assessment than the comparison group. This finding is consistent
with Flower and Hayes (1980) theoretical writing model which states that the materials
available in the task environment influence the writer’s long-term memory, which as
Robinson and Kiewra (1995) point out influences how a writer organizes information. In
this study, students who used and studied the concept map from the task environment
encoded and stored a more efficient representation in memory, which helped in
producing more organized, coherent essays.
One of the most critical processes in writing is the organization of ideas.
According to Novak and Gowin (1984), graphic organizers such as concept maps are
powerful pedagogical tools because they allow learners to visualize concepts as well as
the hierarchical relationships between them. In previous research, DiCecco and Gleason
(2002) also found that students who used graphic organizers for learning science also
scored higher on written essays. In summary, the use of graphic organizers, such as
concepts maps, can be beneficial for students in the area of writing combining their
118
ability to apply newly acquired knowledge as well as express their relational knowledge
in a coherent essay. The writing process can be difficult for many students and the use of
a concept map, organizing concepts and ideas can be beneficial. This effectiveness of
concept maps is evidenced by this current study as well as past studies (DiCecco &
Gleason, 2002).
Individual Word Learning
In addition to discussing the significant differences between the groups, it is
equally critical to discuss areas in which they did not differ in performance.
Specifically, there was not a significant difference between the concept mapping group
and the comparison group on individual word learning, as measured by the matching
vocabulary assessment.
Of interest, in the analysis of graphic organizer research, few studies have used
the matching format as an assessment. This may be due to the fact that the type of
learning theoretically promoted by concept maps (relationships) (Novak & Canas, 2006),
is not easily captured by such a format. Therefore, there may be other literacy
instructional methods that might be more beneficial for individual word learning.
Beck & McKeown (2007) recommends using a “direct and rich instruction”
model in teaching individual word learning. Through this model, teachers explain word
meanings in student-friendly language and provide multiple examples in multiple
contents. They also require students to process the words to be learned deeply by
identifying and explaining both appropriate uses and inappropriate uses in multiple
contexts (Beck & McKeown, 2007). Consistent with this type of instructional practice is
119
a study conducted by Beck, Perfetti, and McKeown (1982) in which they examined the
impact of intense of intense vocabulary intervention on individual word learning with
fourth-grade students. Students were assigned to a either a control group or an
experimental group. Participants in the control group used traditional language arts
instruction following a textbook curriculum. Students in the experimental group received
daily vocabulary instruction during their language arts block. The treatment was over a
five month period. Participants in the experimental condition had the following
treatment: introduction of 8-10 words a week, practice of words in a variety of
instructional practices, and assessment to determine mastery. These instructional
practices included the following: defining tasks (writing definitions), sentencegenerating tasks, classification tasks (categorizing the words), oral and written
production tasks and timed game-like activities. In summary, students in the
experimental group received 2.5 hours of instruction weekly on the 8-10 targeted words
which included 10 encounters with each word. A total of 104 target words were chosen
over the intervention period and were chosen from the Ginn Reading 720 series. They
found that students who participated in the vocabulary intervention program had higher
gains from the pre-test to post-test time-points in vocabulary knowledge as measured by
the Iowa Test of Basic Skills-Vocabulary subtest.
Individual word knowledge is essential to learning science concepts (Rupley &
Slough, 2011). Many students have difficulty with this domain due to limited
background knowledge (DeLuca, 2010) as well as the complex nature of the contentspecific words (Rupley & Slough, 2011). According to Graves (2000) there are four
120
essential components to teaching individual word learning: a) wide independent reading;
b) instruction in specific words to increase comprehension of texts containing these
words; c) instruction in independent word-learning strategies; and d) word-play activities
to motivate and enhance learning. In accordance with these teaching components, there
have been several word learning strategies that have been shown to help students
including: Frayer Model (Stahl & Nagy, 2009); using concept word walls with pictures
(Harvey & Goudvis, 2007); and collaborative strategic reading (Shook, Hazelkorn, &
Lozano, 2011; Vaughn, Klingner, & Bryant, 2001). These will be examined in the
following sections starting with the Frayer model.
Frayer model. Very similar to the individual word learning map is the Frayer
model also referred to a four-square vocabulary learning map (Stahl & Nagy, 2009;
Greenwood, 2002). In this strategy, a box is divided into four sections. In the first
section, the student lists the word to be learned. In the next, section, the student lists
examples of the word. Then, in the section below the word, the student provides a
definition of the word. In the last section, the student provides non-examples of the
word. Figure 9 is an example of a completed Frayer model.
121
Definition:
Mammals can live on land, in
the sea, or under the ground.
Characteristics:
They have hair
They can regulate temperature
They are warm-blooded
Most walk with 2 -4 legs
They have important traits
that are different than other
animals.
Examples:
Mammals
Non-Examples:
humans
whales
cheetahs
bears
frogs
birds
snakes
Figure 9. Frayer Model.
Concept word wall with pictures. In this instructional practice, the student
writes the word to be learned on a card, its definition in his or her own words and draws
an illustration of the word. Then the word is placed on a “word wall” along with other
words that the students have learned throughout the year. According to Harvey &
Goudvis (2007) when students illustrate and write in their own words, they are more
likely to remember the information. In addition, the use of word walls can be adapted to
even secondary students (Vallejo, 2006; Yates, Cuthrell & Rose, 2011). In a study
conducted by Yates et al. (2011), they found that the use of science word walls
displaying science concepts in which they were studying helped increase eighth grade
students’ performance on science achievement tests.
Collaborative learning strategy. In this method, there are four strategies in
learning word knowledge with text (Shook, et al., 2011; Vaughn, Klinger & Bryant,
122
2001). First, the students preview, by discussing and brainstorming what they know
about a certain concept as well as predict what they think will learn. Next, the students
use the strategy of “click and clunk”. By using the “click” strategy, students refer to
portions of text that make sense to them. In the “clunk” strategy, students refer to
portions that do make sense. Next, they use the “get the gist” strategy by summarizing
the important concepts. The last step is called “wrap and review” in which students
review what they have learned. In a study conducted by Shook et al. (2011), they
investigated the impact of the learning collaborative strategy on high school biology
students in learning science concepts. The intervention lasted a period over eight weeks
for two-thirty minute sessions a week. The found that the students’ vocabulary
knowledge increased as measured by multiple-choice quizzes taken at the end of the
week. They also found that the students enjoyed using this strategy in learning science
concepts.
In conclusion, the use of concept mapping is not conducive to teaching individual
word learning. As discussed concept mapping helps students in other areas of learning
science concepts such as relational knowledge and identifying key ideas, but they may
benefit from instructional activities that are direct and rich (Beck & McKeown, 2007) as
mentioned to help them in individual word learning.
Another possible reason for the performance of the concept mapping group on
the matching assessment is that the format of the assessment may have been unfamiliar
to students and was not a valid measure. Due to the format of the state tests of this
school district, students frequently practice using multiple-choice and writing assessment
123
formats. They are rarely given matching assessments. However, both groups (concept
mapping and comparison) would have been at an equal disadvantage.
In conclusion, based on this study and previous research, concept maps do not
appear to promote individual word learning. But as stated earlier, teachers can
incorporate other activities including intensive vocabulary instructional practices that are
rich and direct, such as using the Frayer model, and utilizing word walls to help students
increase their individual word knowledge. In addition, students may benefit from being
assessed in a variety of formats including matching versus instead of being solely
assessed using multiple-choice and writing formats.
Delayed-Recall of Information
Finally, an important feature in this experimental design was through the use of
immediate and delayed post-testing. The results indicate that the concept mapping
group’s gains in relational vocabulary, identifying key ideas and written expression
were maintained in the delayed testing, indicating that concept mapping facilitates
learning as well as retaining the information. According to Robinson (1988), one of the
limitations in past research on graphic organizers is the limited use of assessing students
in a delayed measurement. However, to measure long term learning, delayed measures
are more important than immediate recall.
As expected, all groups performed lower in the delayed post-test than the
immediate post-tests. However, the amount of loss differed between the concept
mapping group and comparison group. In all of the four assessments, the comparison
124
group (questioning group) had a greater point decrease in the mean average between the
time-points of the post-test and the delayed post-test.
In the relational vocabulary assessment, the mean of the comparison group
decreased by 5.52 points, while the concept mapping group only decreased by 4.83
points. The differences were significant for both groups between the post-test time-point
and the delayed post-test time-points, but the concept mapping group had a lower
decrease of the mean than the comparison group. This indicates that participants in the
concept mapping group were better able to sustain their gains in relational knowledge.
In the multiple-choice assessment, the mean of the comparison group decreased
by 7.93 points, while the concept mapping group only decreased by 3.79 points. The
differences were significant between the post-test and delayed test time-point for both
groups but the concept mapping had a lower decrease of the mean. This indicates that
the concept mapping group had better recall of identifying key ideas than the comparison
group.
For the matching assessment, the mean of the comparison group decreased by
6.21 points, while the concept mapping group only decreased by 3.01 points. The
difference between the post-test and delayed post-test time points was significant for the
comparison group but there was not significant for the concept mapping group. This
indicates that the concept mapping group had better recall of individual word learning
than the comparison group. This finding is interesting because as shared earlier there
was not a significant difference between the concept mapping group and comparison
group in the post-test and delayed post-test.
125
For the writing assessment, the comparison group decreased by 8.62 points,
while the concept mapping group only decreased by 2.59 points. There was a significant
difference between the post-test and delayed test time-points for the comparison group
but not for the concept mapping group. Again, this indicates that the participants in the
concept mapping group were able to sustain their ability to apply relational thinking,
identify key information and use domain knowledge through writing than the
comparison group.
The significant difference between groups in a delayed-measure is similar to the
results of Simmons, Griffin and Kameenui (1988) in which their participants using a
post-reading graphic organizer for social studies outperformed students receiving
traditional instruction in a delayed post-test assessment. However, in contrast, the
study’s results is in contradiction to a study conducted by Griffin, Malone and Kameenui
(1995) in which participants in the comparison groups who received traditional basal
instruction scored significantly higher than participants using graphic organizers.
However, according to Griffin, Malone and Kameenui, the delayed results findings are
“suspect” due to the fact that participants in the comparison groups scored higher on the
delayed post-test than they did in the immediate post-test.
In summary, in all of the four assessments, the participants in the concept
mapping group had a greater recall of relational knowledge, identifying key ideas,
individual word knowledge as well as in written expression which was a combination of
key ideas and relational knowledge. This indicates that the use of concept mapping can
help students in retention of learning science concepts.
126
Concluding Thoughts
In conclusion, concept mapping can be beneficial in helping students increase
relational knowledge as evidenced by the significant difference between the concept
mapping group and comparison group. Relational knowledge is essential to science
learning because it is imperative for students to be able to identify relationships and
understand their connection (Pearson, Moje & Greenleaf, 2010). In addition, concept
mapping can be beneficial in helping students identify key ideas in science as evidenced
by the significant difference between the concept mapping and the comparison group.
This is an important skill for students to truly grasp scientific concepts and understand
science phenomena (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008; Pearson, et al., 2010). Lastly, concept
mapping can be advantageous in writing combining the skills of relational knowledge
and the identification of key ideas (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). Writing can be a difficult
process for many students and the visuospatioal elements of graphic organizers
especially its organizational structure can aide students in the identification and
understanding of relationships of science concepts. In addition, concept mapping can
help students sustain their relational knowledge, ability to identify key ideas and their
ability in written expression, as well as individual word knowledge. The findings from
this study can be promising for educators because advanced science skills are imperative
for our students to be productive members of society (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008;
Pearson, et al., 2010). Next, we will examine the limitations for this study.
127
Limitations
The study had several limitations that might have affected the study or the
statistical outcome of the data.
1.
Length of the study. A longer treatment period would provide students with
more opportunities to further develop their skills associated with the use of
concept mapping with additional topics and concepts in science. The length
of the study (8 days) was based on the instructional time period allotted for
the concept of “soil formation” according to the district’s scope and
sequence. These longer and more diverse conditions would increase the
generalizability of the results of the current study. It would also be interesting
to see if the levels of differences between the concept mapping group and the
comparison group would increase, decrease or sustain.
2. Time period between post-test and delayed post-test. Due to constraints of
the school calendar, there was only five days between the post-test and
delayed post-test. It would have been ideal if there was a longer period
between the post-test and delayed post-test.
3. Number of students. Due to the size of the school, only 58 students were
available to participate. In addition, due to the class sizes, the groups of
students were small. The average classroom size is larger than the classroom
sizes used in this study.
128
Implications for Teaching & Research
While moderate in scale, the results of this study indicated that concept mapping
may be an effective strategy to implement when students are studying from multiple
sources. The use of concept mapping did not take more time than answering
comprehension questions, but was more effective on three of four assessments, in both
immediate and delayed post-testing. Using concepts maps with a set of related texts,
facilitated students to make connections across texts and focusing on the underlying
science concepts. Additionally, the discourse and interaction between students when
creating the concept maps may have been a rich source of learning. It is also interesting
to note that the concept mapping group had an advantage on the relational vocabulary,
but not on the matching vocabulary assessment. This finding indicates that concept
mapping may be suited to promote certain types of knowledge. Finally, while
technology was not used this study, multiple software programs (e.g., Inspiration) would
allow students to authentically incorporate technology into similar lessons with concept
mapping.
Future Directions
This study lends itself to being replicated in different conditions including:
students with learning disabilities; students who are second-language learners; and
integrating the use of technology. Little or no research has used interactive
informational read-alouds with concept mapping in these conditions.
Students with learning disabilities. Informational text can be difficult for
students with learning disabilities to make inferences, to make connections, to identify
129
key ideas as well as to determine relationships between concepts (DiCecco & Gleason,
2002). There has been an increase in research examining the use of graphic organizers
with informational text on students with learning disabilities (DiCecco & Gleason;
Horton, Lovitt & Bergerund, 1990). But the research has provided inconsistent results.
DiCecco and Gleason (2002) reported in their study examining the use of graphic
organizers on informational text with middle-school students and found mixed results.
There was not a significant difference between the graphic organizer group and the
comparison group who were taught using traditional instruction on factual knowledge as
measured by a multiple-choice tests and quizzes. In contrast, the graphic organizer
scored significantly higher on relational knowledge as measured by written essays.
Horton, Lovitt and Bergerund (1990) reported in their study with secondary students in
content area classes (science and social studies) that students who used graphic
organizers in reading informational text passages had higher recall on key ideas than the
students in the comparison group who did not use a graphic organizer. In addition, little
or no research has examined the effect of graphic organizers on elementary students.
Second-language students. Another possible replication of this study could be
with second-language learners. The findings in this study helped students in relational
knowledge and recalling key ideas could be beneficial to second-language learners in
learning concepts. Ritchie and Gimendez (1996) conducted a study with fourth-grade
students who were second-language learners whose prominent language was Spanish.
One group created a computer-generated graphic organizer and one group created
embedded list of topics. The group using graphic organizers performed significantly
130
higher than the comparison group in short-term recall (post-test) and the long-term recall
(delayed post-test) and found that the use of graphic organizers helped students in
learning and recalling concepts.
Integrating technology. Finally, another possible replication for this study
would to integrate computer-generated graphic organizers using Inspiration. In this
possible study, students would create their own graphic organizers using computer
software (Inspiration). We live in a society in which technology is becoming
increasingly important and students could benefit with the incorporation of multimedia
learning. In addition, with the increase of technology, there has been a heightened
interest on the effect of computer-based/multimedia learning including on cognitive load
(Mayer & Moreno, 2002; Chang & Yang, 2010). According to the cognitive theory of
multimedia learning (Mayer & Moreno, 2002) the instructional design can impact
cognitive load. Under this theory, it is more advantageous to present multimedia
messages through words and pictures (graphics) than solely with words. But this theory
has been tested with mixed results with younger learners (McTigue, 2009; Chang &
Yang, 2010) warranting the need for further research and careful design.
Another incorporating of technology could be the integration of interactive
white-boards also referred to as Interactive Smart Boards. Little or no research has
combined the use of concept mapping, interactive informational read-alouds, and
using Interactive Smart Boards. As evidenced from this study, concept mapping
coupled with interactive informational read-alouds has a positive impact on learning
science concepts. It has also been shown that the use of Interactive Smart Boards can
131
help students in learning science in past studies (Hogan & Gomm, 2001; Preston &
Mowbray, 2008). The combining of these instructional practices can have promising
results for the education world in science instruction.
132
REFERENCES
Abadiano, H. R., & Turner, J. (2002). Reading expository text: The challenges of
students with learning disabilities. The NERA Journal, 38(2), 49-55.
Alger, C. (2007). Engaging student teachers’ hearts and minds in the struggle to address
illiteracy in content area classrooms. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literature,
50(3), 620-630.
Alvermann, D. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on text structure.
Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 44-48.
Alvermann, D., & Boothby, P. (1983). A preliminary investigation of the differences in
children’s retention of “inconsiderate text”. Reading Psychology, 4, 237-246.
Amadieu, F., van Gog, T., Paas, F., Tricot, A., & Marine, C. (2009). Effects of prior
knowledge and concept-map structure on disorientation, cognitive load and
learning. Learning & Instruction, 19(5), 376-386. doi:
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.005
Anderson, R., Hiebert, E., Wilkinson, I., & Scott, J. (1985). Becoming a nation of
readers. Champaign, IL: National Academy of Education and Center for the
Study of Reading.
Anderson, T. H., & Huang, S. C. (1989). On using concepts maps to assess the
comprehension effects of reading expository text. (Tech. Rep. No. 483).
Cambridge, MA: Center for the Study of Reading.
Armbruster, B. B. (1986). Schema theory and the design of content area textbooks.
Educational Psychologist, 21(4), 253-267.
133
Armbruster, B. B., & Anderson, T. H. (1988). On selecting considerate content
textbooks. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 47–52.
Asan, A. (2007). Concept mapping in science: A case study of fifth grade students.
Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 186-196.
Ausubel, D. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. Oxford, UK: Grune
& Stratton.
Beck, I. L., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. G. (1982). Effects of long-term vocabulary
instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 74(4), 506-521.
Beck, I., McKeown, M., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the
author: A Yearlong classroom implementation to engage students with text. The
Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 385-414.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001a). Inviting students into the pursuit of meanings.
Educational Psychology Review. 13(3), 225-241.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001b). Text Talk: Capturing the benefits of readaloud experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher, 55(1), 10-20.
Beck, I., McKeown, M. & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary
instruction. New York: Guilford Press.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2007). Increasing young low-income children’s oral
vocabulary repertoires through rich and focused instruction. The Elementary
School Journal, 107(3), 251-271. doi: 10.1086/511706
134
Best, R., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y. & McNamara, D. (2005). Deep-level comprehension of
science texts: The role of the reader and the Text. Topics in Language Disorders,
25(1), 65-83.
Braselton, S., & Decker, B. C. (1994). Using graphic organizers to improve the reading
of mathematics. The Reading Teacher, 48(3), 276-281.
Bybee, R., McCrae, B., & Laurie, R. (2009). PISA 2006: An assessment of scientific
literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 865-883.
Chall, J., Jacobs, V., & Baldwin, L. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall
behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chang, C. C., & Yang, F. Y. (2010). Exploring the cognitive loads of high-school
students as they learn concepts in web-based environments. Computer &
Education, 55(2), 673-680. doi: 10.10161j.compedu.2010.03.001
Chase, A. & Bravo, M. (2007). Without soil. Nashua, NH: Delta Education.
Conderman, G., & Elf, N. (2007). What’s in this book? Engaging students through a
textbook exploration activity. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23, 111-116.
Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). Reading strategies for meaningful learning from
prose. In M. Pressley & J. Levin (Eds), Cognitive strategy research, (pp. 87113), New York: Springer-Verlag.
Cooper, G. (1998). Research into cognitive load theory and instructional design at
UNSW, Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales. Retreived from:
http://dwb4.unl.edu/Diss/Cooper/UNSW.htm.
135
DeLuca, E. (2010). Unlocking academic vocabulary. The Science Teacher, 77(3), 2732.
DiCecco, V. M., & Gleason, M. M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational
knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306320.
Donahue, D. (2003). Reading across the great divide: English and math teachers
apprentice one another as readers and disciplinary insiders. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literature, 47(1), 24-37.
Donovan, C., & Smolkin, L. (2002). Considering genre, content, and visual features in
the selection of trade books for science instruction. The Reading Teacher, 55(6),
502-520.
Draper, R. J. (2011). Professional resources. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
54(6), 469-472. doi: 10.1598/JAAL.54.6.10
Dugard, P., Todman, J., & Staines, H. (2010). Approaching multivariate analysis: A
practical introduction. New York: Routledge.
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first
grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202-224.
Duke, N. K. (2003). Reading to learn from the very beginning: Information books in
early childhood. Young Children, 58(2), 14-20.
Ericson, B. (2001). Teaching reading in high school English classes. Urbana, IL:
National Council of Teachers of English.
136
Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school.
International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 491-520.
Fang, Z. & Wei, Y. (2010). Improving middle school students’ science literacy through
reading infusion. The Journal of Educational Research, 103, 262-273. doi:
10.1080/00220670903383051
Faulkner, R. (2007). Minerals. Chicago, IL: Raintree Publishers.
Feldt, R., Feldt, R., & Kilbury, K. (2002). Acquisition, maintenance, and transfer of a
questioning strategy in second-and third-grade students to learn from science
textbooks. Reading Psychology, 23(3), 181-199.
Fensham, P. J. (2009). Real world contexts in PISA Science: Implications for contextbased science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 46(8).
Fields, A. & Hole, G. (2003). How to design and report experiments. London: Sage
Publishers.
Fields, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage Publishers.
Fisher, D., Flood, J., Lapp, D., & Frey, N. (2004). Interactive read-alouds: Is there a
common set of implementation practices? The Reading Teacher, 58, 8-17.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1980) The cognition of discovery: Defining a rhetorical
problem. College Composition and Communication 31, 21-32.
Goodman, N. (2007). Dirt. New York: National Geographic Society-Hampton Brown.
Graves, M. (2000). A vocabulary program to complement and bolster a middle-grade
comprehension program. In B. M. Taylor, M.F. Graves, & P. Van Den Broek
137
(Eds). Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades.
New York: Teachers College Press, (pp. 32-40).
Greenwood, S. C. (2002). Making words matter: Vocabulary study in the content areas.
Clearing House, 75(5), 258-264.
Griffin, C. C., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1991). Investigating the
effectiveness of graphic organizer instruction on the comprehension and recall of
science content by students with learning disabilities. Journal of Reading,
Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 7(4), 355-376.
Griffin, C. C., Malone, L. D., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Effects of graphic organizer
instruction on fifth grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 89(2), 98107.
Gurney, B. (2005). Sand and soil: Earth’s building blocks. New York: Crabtree
Publishers.
Guthrie, J. (1997). Engagement in reading for young adolescents. Journal of Adolescent
and Adult Literacy, 40(6), 438-446.
Guthrie, J. T., & McCann, A. D. (1997).Characteristics of classrooms that promote
motivations and strategies for learning. In J. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.),
Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp.
128-148). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Harvey, S. (1998). Nonfiction matters: Reading, writing, and research in grades 3-8.
York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
138
Harvey, S. & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension for
understanding and engagement. Portland, OR: Stenhouse.
Heck, R., Thomas, S., & Tabata, L. (2010). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling with
IBM SPSS. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Hedin, L. & Conderman, G. (2010). Teaching students to comprehend informational text
through rereading. The Reading Teacher, 63(7), 556-565.
Heilman, A., Blair, T., & Rupley, W. (2002) Principles and practices of teaching
reading. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Heisey, N., & Kucan, L. (2010). Introducing science concepts to primary students
through read-alouds: Interactions and multiple texts make the difference. The
Reading Teacher, 63(8), 666-676.
Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to
the core of middle and high school improvement. Alliance for Excellent
Education. Retrieved from: http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications
/PDF/Content_Areas_report.pdf
Hiebert, E. H. (2005). State reform policy and the task textbooks pose for the first-grade
readers. The Elementary School Journal, 105(3), 245-266.
Hogan, K. & Gomm, D. (2001). How can technology enhance children’s natural
curiosity? Computers in the school, 16(3), 237-246.
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., & Bergerud, D. (1990). The effectiveness of graphic
organizers for three classifications of secondary students in content area classes.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 12-22, 29.
139
Hyde, N. (2010). Soil erosion and how to prevent it. New York: Crabtree Publishers.
Jang, S. (2010) The impact of incorporating collaborative concept mapping with
coteaching techniques in elementary science classes. School Science and
Mathematics, 110(2), 86-97.
Jeong, J., Gaffney, J. S. & Choi, J. (2010). Availability and use of informational texts in
second, third, and fourth grade classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English,
44(4), 435-456.
Katayama, A. D., & Robinson, D. H. (2000). Getting students partially involved in notetaking using graphic organizers. Journal of Experimental Education, 68, 119133.
Kern, C. (2008). Mapping for conceptual change. The Science Teacher, 76(6), 32-38.
Kim, A., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S. (2004) Graphic organizers and their effects
on the reading comprehension of students with learning disabilities: A synthesis
of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 105-118.
Klein, P. D. (2000). Elementary students’ strategies for writing-to-learn in science.
Cognition & Instruction, 18(3), 317-348.
Koontz, M. (2002). Composting: Nature’s recyclers. Minneapolis, MN: Picture Window
Books.
Kucan, L., & Beck, I. (2003). Inviting students to talk about expository text: A
comparison of two discourse environments and their effects on comprehension.
Reading Research and Instruction, 42(3), 1-31.
140
Kulhavy, W., Lee, J., & Caterino, L. (1985). Conjoint retention of maps and related
discourse. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 28–37.
Lee, V. R. (2010). Adaptions and continuities in the use and design of visual
representations in US middle school science textbooks. International Journal of
Science Education, 32(8), 1099-1126. doi: 10.1080109500690903253916
Leslie, K., Low, R., Jin, R., & Sweller, J. (2011). Reducancy and expertise reversal
effects when using educational technology to learn primary school science.
Educational Technology Research & Development, 55, 1-13.
Lloyd, S. (2004). Using comprehension strategies as a springboard for student talk.
Journal of Adolescent Literacy, 48(2), 114-124.
Loxterman, J. A., Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1994). The effects of thinking aloud
during reading on students’ comprehension of more or less coherent text.
Reading Research Quarterly, 29(4), 352-367.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning.
Learning & Instruction, 12(1), 107-119. doi: 107-11910.10161S09594752(01)00018-4
McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). The use of adjunct displays to
facilitate comprehension of causal relationships in expository text. Instructional
Science, 37, 65-89. doi: 10.1007/s11251-007-9036-3
McKeown, M. G. & Beck, I. L. (1993). Grapping with text ideas: Questioning the
author. Reading Teacher, 46(7), 560-567.
141
McTigue, E. M. (2009). Does multimedia learning theory extend to middle-school
students? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 143-153.
doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.12.003
Michalsky, T., Mevarech, Z., & Haibi, L. (2009). Reading scientific texts: Effects of
metacognitive instruction. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(5), 363376.
Miller, D. (2002). Reading with meaning: Teaching comprehension in the primary
grades. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Montelongo, J.A., & Herter, R. J., Ansaldo, R., & Hatter, N. (2010). Using technology to
support expository reading and writing in science class. Science Activities, 47(3),
89-103.
Morrison, V., & Wlodarczyk, L. (2009). Revisiting read-aloud: Instructional strategies
that encourage students’ engagement with texts. The Reading Teacher, 63(2),
110-118.
Morrow, L. M., Pressley, M., Smith, J. K., & Smith, M. (1997). The effect of a
literature-based program integrated into literacy and science instruction with
children from diverse backgrounds. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(1), 54-76.
Moss, B. (2005). Making a case for effective content area literacy instruction in the
elementary grades. The Reading Teacher, 59(1), 46-54.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2009). The nation’s report card: State
reading 2009. Washington, DC. Author.
142
Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006) Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A
meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413-448.
Ness, M. (2011). Teachers’ use and attitudes toward informational text in K-5
classrooms. Reading Psychology. 32, 28-53. doi: 10.1080/0270271090324322
Newcomer, P. L., & Hammill, D. D. (2008). The Test of language developmentPrimary-4th Edition; East Moline, IL: Linguisystems.
Novak, J., & Godwin, B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as
facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Novak, J. D. (2005). Results and implications of a 12 year longitudal study of science
concept learning. Research in Science Education, 35, 23-40. doi:
10.1007/s111165-004-34-31-4
Novak, J. D. & Canas, A. J. (2006). The theory underlying concept maps and how to
construct and use them. Technical Report IMHC. Florida Institute for Human and
Machine Cognition, Pensacola, FL.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Olien, B. (2001). Erosion. Mankato, MN: Capstone Press.
Oliver, K. (2009). An investigation on concept mapping to improve the reading of
science texts. Journal Science Education Technology, 18, 402-419.
143
O’Reilly, T., & McNamara, D. (2007). Reversing the reverse cohesion effect: Good texts
can be better for strategic high knowledge readers. Discourse Processes, 43(2),
121-151.
Oster, L. (2001). Using the think-aloud for the reading process. The Reading Teacher,
55(1), 64-69.
Oyler, C. (1996). Sharing authority: Student initiatives during teacher-led read-alouds of
informational books. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(2), 149-160.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Paivio, A. (2006). Dual coding theory and education. Paper represented at the
conference of Pathways to Literacy Achievement for High Poverty Children, The
University of Michigan School of Education, Ann Arbor, MI.
Paivio, A., & Csapo, K. (1973). Picture superiority in free recall: Imagery or dual
coding? Cognitive Psychology, 5, 176-206.
Palmer, R. G., & Stewart, R. A. (2003). Nonfiction trade book use in primary grades.
Reading Teacher, 57(1), 28-48.
Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317–344.
Pearson, D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service
of the other. Science, 328, 459-463.
Pfeffer, W. (2003). Wiggling worms at work. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. C. (2007). The continuum of literacy learning, grades K-2:
A guide to teaching. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
144
Pressley, M., Rankin, J. & Yokoi, L. (1996). A survey of instructional practices of
primary teachers nominated as effective in promoting literacy. Elementary
School Journal, 96(4), 363-384.
Preston, C., & Mowbray, L. (2008). Use of SMART boards for teaching, learning and
assessment in kindergarten science. Teaching Science, 54(2), 50-53.
Purnell, K., & Solman, R. (1991). The effects of technical illustrations on cognitive load.
Instructional Science, 20(5-6), 443-462.
Raphael, T. E. (1984). Teaching learners about sources of information for answering
comprehension questions. Journal of Reading, 27, 303-311.
Reveles, J., & Brown, B. (2008). Contextual shifting: Teachers emphasizing students’
academic identify to promote scientific literacy. Science Education, 92(6), 10151041.
Ritchie, D. C., & Gimenez, F. (1995). Effectiveness of graphic organizers in computerbased instruction with dominant Spanish and dominant English speaking
students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(2), 221-133.
Robinson, D. H., & Kiewra, K. A. (1995). Visual argument: Graphic organizers are
superior to outlines in improving learning from text. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 87(3), 455-467.
Robinson, D. H. (1998). Graphic organizers as aids to text learning. Reading Research &
Instruction, 37, 85-105.
145
Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A. D., Beth, A. S., Hsieh, Y. P., & Vanderveen, A. (2006).
Increasing text comprehension and graphic note taking using a partial graphic
organizer. The Journal of Educational Research, 100, 103-113.
Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (2001). Implementing an in-depth expanded science
model in elementary schools: Multi-year findings, research issues, and policy
implications. International Journal of Science Education, 23(4), 373-404.
Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the
literacy work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Rupley, W., & Slough, S. (2011). Building prior knowledge and vocabulary in science in
the intermediate grades: Creating hooks for learning. Literacy Research and
Instruction. 49(2), 99-107.
Sadoski, M. (2005). A dual coding view of vocabulary learning. Reading & Writing
Quarterly, 21(3), 221-238. doi: 10.1080/10573560590949359
Salkind, N. (2000). Statistics for people who think they hate statistics. Thousands Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Saul, E., & Dieckman, D. (2005). Choosing and using informational trade books.
Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 502-513.
Schaal, S., Bogner, F., & Girwidz, R. (2009). Concept mapping assessment of media
assisted learning in interdisciplinary science education. School Science and
Mathematics, 110(2), 86-97.
Schmid, R., & Telaro, G. (1990). Concept mapping as an instructional strategy for high
school biology. Journal Education Research, 84(2), 78-85.
146
Schroeder, M., Mckeough, A., Graham, S., Stock, H., & Bisanz, G. (2009) The
Contribution of Trade Books to Early Science Literacy: In and out of School.
Research in Science Education, 39(2), 231-250.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents:
Rethinking content area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40-60.
Shearer, B. (1997). Making the connection between research and reality: Strategies
teachers use to read and evaluate journal articles. Journal of Education
Psychology, 89(4), 592-598.
Shook, A., Hazelkorn, M., & Lozano, E. (2011). Science vocabulary for all. The Science
Teacher, 78(3), 45-49.
Simmons, D. C., Griffin, C. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1988). Effects of teacher-constructed
pre-and post-graphic organization instruction on sixth grade science students’
comprehension and recall. The Journal of Educational Research, 82(1), 15-21.
Slough, S., McTigue, E. M., Kim, S., & Jennings, S. K. (2010). Science textbooks’ use
of graphical representations: A descriptive analysis of four sixth grade science
texts. Reading Psychology, 31, 301-325. doi: 10.1080102710903656502
Smolkin, L. B., & Donovan, C. A. (2001). The contexts of comprehension: The
informational read-aloud, comprehension acquisition, and comprehension
instruction in a first-grade classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 102(2),
92-122.
Smolkin, L. B., & Donovan, C. A. (2003). Supporting comprehension acquisition for
read-aloud, Exceptionality, 11(1), 25-38.
147
Smolkin, L. B., McTigue, E. M., Donovan, C. A., & Coleman, J. M. (2008).
Explanation in science trade books recommended for use with elementary
students. Science Education, 93(4), 587-610. doi: 10.1002/sce.20314
Stice, C., & Alvarez, M. (1987). Hierarchical concept mapping in the early grades. Child
Education, 64(2), 89-96.
Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2007) Learning by doing versus learning by viewing:
Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author provided
graphic organizer, Journal of Educational Psychology, 99 (4), 808-820. doi:
10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.808
Sturm, J. & Rankin-Erickson, J. (2002). Effects of hand-drawn and computer-generated
concept mapping on the expository writing of middle school students with
learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 124-140.
Sweller, J. (1993). Some cognitive processes and their consequences for the organization
and presentation of information. Australian Journal of Psychology, 45(1), 1-8.
Sweller, J. (2006). Discussion of “Emerging topics in cognitive load research: Using
information and learner characteristics in the design of powerful learning
environments”. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 353-357.
Tzeng, J. (2010). Design of concept maps and their impacts on readers’ performance in
memory and reasoning while reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 33(2),
128-147. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01404
Vacca, R. (2002). Making a difference in adolescent school lives: Visible and invisible
aspects of content area reading. In A. Farstrup & S. Samuels (Eds.), What
148
research has to say about reading instruction, (pp. 184-204), Newark, NJ:
International Reading Association.
Vallejo, B. (2006). Word wall. The Science Teacher, 73(2), 58-60.
Van den Broek, P. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes &
knowledge representation. Science, 328(5977), 453456.doi:10.1126/science.1182594
Vaughn, S., Klinger, J., & Bryant, D. (2001). Collaborative strategic reading as a means
of enhance peer-mediated instruction for reading comprehension and content area
learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 66-74.
Vekiri, I. (2002). What is the value of graphical displays in learning? Educational
Psychology Review, 14(3), 261-312.
Walker, B. (2005). Thinking aloud: Struggling readers often require more than a model.
The Reading Teacher. 58(7), 688-692.
Waller, R. (1981). Understanding network diagrams. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles, CA.
Williams, J., Hall, K., Lauer, K., Stafford, B., DeSisto, L., & de Cani, J. (2005).
Expository text comprehension in the primary grade classroom. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 97(4), 538-550.
Winn, W. (1991). Learning from maps and diagrams. Educational Psychology Review,
3(3), 211-247.
Yates, P., Cuthrell, K., & Rose, M. (2011). Out of the room and into the hall: Making
content word walls work. The Clearing House, 84(1), 31-36.
149
APPENDIX A
PARENT INFORMATION AND CONSENT LETTERS
November 19, 2010
Dear Parents and/or Guardians
As you know, reading is vital to learning as well as a vital component to your
child’s future. As a researcher, at Texas A & M University, it is my goal to investigate
instructional procedures that can increase student achievement. As a former teacher at
Fields Elementary, I want to discover ways to help our students. They are indeed our
future scientists, teachers, engineers, nurses, entrepreneurs and the list continues. As an
educator and researcher, it is my role to ensure they are prepared. From November 30th
to December 9th, I will be conducting an intervention study that involves information
read-alouds. Your child has been chosen to participate in this study. The intervention
study will have eight days of instructional lessons consisting of 45 minutes that will
include an interactive read-aloud and participating in a question and writing activity.
There will also be several assessments measuring your child’s learning. The material that
will be taught aligns with the districts scope and sequence. In the next week, you will
receive a letter of permission for your child to participate. This study has potential
benefits including increasing reading achievement. Please do not hesitate to contact me
if you have any questions or concerns.
Please bring back the permission slip by Tuesday, November 23rd.
Working to improve education,
Jaime Berry
7336
Email: [email protected]
Phone number: 281 701-
150
November 19, 2010
Dear Parents and/or Guardians
As you know, reading is vital to learning as well as a vital component to your
child’s future. As a researcher, at Texas A & M University, it is my goal to investigate
instructional procedures that can increase student achievement. As a former teacher at
Fields Elementary, I want to discover ways to help our students. They are indeed our
future scientists, teachers, engineers, nurses, entrepreneurs and the list continues. As an
educator and researcher, it is my role to ensure they are prepared. From November 30th
to December 9th, I will be conducting an intervention study that involves using graphic
organizers (concept mapping) with information read-alouds. Your child has been chosen
to participate in this study. The intervention study will have eight days of instructional
lessons consisting of 45 minutes that will include an interactive read-aloud and
participating in a graphic organizer activity. There will also be several assessments
measuring your child’s learning. A survey will also be administered to assess your
child’s attitude/likeness toward using graphic organizers in their learning. The material
that will be taught aligns with the districts scope and sequence. In the next week, you
will receive a letter of permission for your child to participate. This study has potential
benefits including increasing reading achievement. Please do not hesitate to contact me
if you have any questions or concerns.
Please bring back the permission slip by Tuesday, November 23rd.
Working to improve education,
Jaime Berry, Email: [email protected]
Phone number: 281 701-7336
151
PARENT PERMISSION FORM FOR STUDENTS IN QUESTIONING GROUP
How does the use of questioning and concept mapping affect students’ learning of science
concepts?
Introduction
The purpose of this form is to provide you (as the parent of a prospective research study
participant) information that may affect your decision as to whether or not to let your child
participate in this research study. Also, if you decide to let your child be involved in this study, this
form will be used to record your consent.
If you agree, your child will be asked to participate in a research study using graphic organizers.
The purpose of this study is to determine how students with different reading abilities respond to
graphic organizers. He/she was selected to be a possible participant because he/she is a third
grade student at Fields Elementary.
What will my child be asked to do?
If you allow your child to participate in this study, they will be asked to do the following:
On November 30th, he/she will participate in a brief pretest over the material that will be
taught. This will be to test what he/she knows about the topic.
On November 30th-December 9th, your child will participate in an informational interactive
read-aloud using research based questioning techniques. (Teacher will ask students’
questions to strengthen comprehension and understanding)
Then on December 10th, your child will be assessed using a brief test that will be very
similar to the pretest.
On December 15th, your child will be assessed to determine if they retained the
information taught.
Participation may be video recorded.
What are the risks involved in this study?
The risks associated in this study are minimal, and are not greater than risks your child ordinarily
encountered in daily life.
What are the possible benefits of this study?
The purpose of this study is to determine what tools can improve reading comprehension. The
possible benefits can improve your child’s reading.
Does my child have to participate?
No, your child doesn’t have to be in this research study. You can agree to allow your child to be in
the study now and change your mind later without any penalty.
152
This research study will take place during regular classroom activities; however, if you do not want
your child to participate, an alternate activity will be available. Your child will participate in a
research activity on the same topic.
What if my child does not want to participate?
In addition to your permission, your child must agree to participate in the study. If you child does
not want to participate they will not be included in the study and there will be no penalty. If your
child initially agrees to be in the study he/she can change their mind later without any penalty.
Who will know about my child’s participation in this research study?
This study is confidential.
The records of this study will be kept private. No identifiers linking you or your child to this study
will be included in any sort of report that might be published. Research records will be stored
securely and only I, Jaime Berry will have access to the records.
If you choose to allow your child to participate in this study, they will be video recorded. Any
recordings will be stored securely and only I, Jaime Berry will have access to the recordings. Any
recordings will be kept for one week and then erased.
Whom do I contact with questions about the research?
If you have questions regarding this study, you may contact:
Jaime Berry, [email protected]; 281 701 7336
Whom do I contact about my child’s rights as a research participant?
This research study has been reviewed by the Human Subjects’ Protection Program and/or the
Institutional Review Board at Texas A&M University. For research-related problems or questions
regarding your rights as a research participant, you can contact these offices at (979)458-4067 or
[email protected].
Signature
Please be sure you have read the above information, asked questions and received answers to
your satisfaction. You will be given a copy of the consent form for your records. By signing this
document, you consent to allow your child to participate in this study.
______ My child MAY be video recorded.
______ My child MAY NOT be video recorded.
Signature of Parent/Guardian: __________________________ Date: ______________
Printed Name
___________________________________________________________________
Printed Name of Child:
___________________________________________________________
153
PARENT PERMISSION FORM FOR STUDENTS IN QUESTIONING GROUP
How does the use of questioning and concept mapping affect students’ learning of science
concepts?
Introduction
The purpose of this form is to provide you (as the parent of a prospective research study
participant) information that may affect your decision as to whether or not to let your child
participate in this research study. Also, if you decide to let your child be involved in this study, this
form will be used to record your consent.
If you agree, your child will be asked to participate in a research study using graphic organizers.
The purpose of this study is to determine how students with different reading abilities respond to
graphic organizers. He/she was selected to be a possible participant because he/she is a third
grade student at Fields Elementary.
What will my child be asked to do?
If you allow your child to participate in this study, they will be asked to do the following:
On November 30th, he/she will participate in a brief pretest over the material that will be
taught. This will be to test what he/she knows about the topic.
On November 30th-December 9th, your child will participate in an informational interactive
read-aloud using research based questioning techniques. (Teacher will ask students’
questions to strengthen comprehension and understanding)
Then on December 10th, your child will be assessed using a brief test that will be very
similar to the pretest.
On December 15th, your child will be assessed to determine if they retained the
information taught.
Participation may be video recorded.
What are the risks involved in this study?
The risks associated in this study are minimal, and are not greater than risks your child ordinarily
encountered in daily life.
What are the possible benefits of this study?
The purpose of this study is to determine what tools can improve reading comprehension. The
possible benefits can improve your child’s reading.
Does my child have to participate?
154
No, your child doesn’t have to be in this research study. You can agree to allow your child to be in
the study now and change your mind later without any penalty.
This research study will take place during regular classroom activities; however, if you do not want
your child to participate, an alternate activity will be available. Your child will participate in a
research activity on the same topic.
What if my child does not want to participate?
In addition to your permission, your child must agree to participate in the study. If you child does
not want to participate they will not be included in the study and there will be no penalty. If your
child initially agrees to be in the study he/she can change their mind later without any penalty.
Who will know about my child’s participation in this research study?
This study is confidential.
The records of this study will be kept private. No identifiers linking you or your child to this study
will be included in any sort of report that might be published. Research records will be stored
securely and only I, Jaime Berry will have access to the records.
If you choose to allow your child to participate in this study, they will be video recorded. Any
recordings will be stored securely and only I, Jaime Berry will have access to the recordings. Any
recordings will be kept for one week and then erased.
Whom do I contact with questions about the research?
If you have questions regarding this study, you may contact:
Jaime Berry, [email protected]; 281 701 7336
Whom do I contact about my child’s rights as a research participant?
This research study has been reviewed by the Human Subjects’ Protection Program and/or the
Institutional Review Board at Texas A&M University. For research-related problems or questions
regarding your rights as a research participant, you can contact these offices at (979)458-4067 or
[email protected].
Signature
Please be sure you have read the above information, asked questions and received answers to
your satisfaction. You will be given a copy of the consent form for your records. By signing this
document, you consent to allow your child to participate in this study.
______ My child MAY be video recorded.
______ My child MAY NOT be video recorded.
Signature of Parent/Guardian: _______________________________Date: ______________
Printed Name:
___________________________________________________________________
Printed Name of Child:
___________________________________________________________
155
APPENDIX B
ASSESSMENTS
Relational Vocabulary/Categorization
Directions:
The teacher will read aloud the following test to the students one on one.
“Hi. I am going to state three words. I need you to tell me how they relate. For
example, in the words “ocean, lake, river”. How are they the same?”
If students answer “they are all types of water”, go on to question number one.
If student is incorrect, use another example.
In the first example, ocean, lake and river are all types of water, or bodies of water.
Let’s try another example. “hat, baseball cap, helmet”. (Student typical response
should be “you wear on your head”).
Questions:
1. subsoil, parent material, topsoil (types of soil)
2. slugs, worms, snails (types of decomposers)
3. clay, silt, sand (types of soil)
4. wind, water, ice (types of erosion or types of weather that change the Earth
surface)
5. Grand Canyon, Mammoth Cave, Arches National Park (Examples of erosion)
6. fungi, bacteria, protozoa (organisms in the soil that help decompose)
7. twigs, dead leaves, plant remains (types of organic matter)
8. planting trees, decreasing cutting down trees and plants, recycling paper to
reduce need for wood.(ways to help environment; ways to help soil formation)
9. sunlight, water, air (things plants need to grow)
10. tropical, desert, artic (Types of soils/climates)
156
Matching Vocabulary
Teacher Directions: On the first column, there is a list of words. Use the second column to find its
definition. Let’s do some sample problems together. What is the definition of
“Prediction/Hypothesis?”. Use the second column and write the letter that corresponds by number
one. The correct answer is “B”. A Prediction/Hypothesis is “Use what you know to tell what you
think will happen”. Let’s try number two. What is the definition of “Matter”? The correct answer is
“A”. Matter is anything that has mass and takes up space. The last sample question is “Magnets”.
Write the letter of the definition for magnets. The correct answer is “C”. Magnets are any piece of
iron or steel that can attract iron or steel.
Sample Problems
1._______Prediction/Hypothesis
A. Anything that has mass and takes up space
2._______Matter
B. Use what you know to tell what you think will
happen
3._______Magnets
C. Any piece of iron or steel that can attract
iron or steel.
In the box below you will see ten terms. Match the definition to the words. Write the letter of the
definition that matches the terms on the left. You will have 15 minutes to complete this. It is okay if
you do not know all your answers. Please try your best.
A. Mass of small particles carried along by flowing water. (sediments)
1. ____Soil
B. Changes in Earth’s surface; Soil carried away by water, ice, or wind
(erosion)
2.____Organic
Matter
C. Rocks or stones broken down by wind, rain and ice. (weathering)
D. Collected sediment being dropped or dumped (decomposition).
3.____ Erosion
E. Remains of organisms (organic matter).
4.____Nutrients
F. Useful chemicals in rocks (minerals)
G. Group Together
5.____ Decompose
H. Material that plants and animals need to grow (nutrients)
6.____Weathering
I. Thin layer of material on Earth’s surface in which plants have their
roots; made of many things including weathered rock and dead plants.
(soil)
7.____Sediments
J. Creatures that break down organic material and eat them
(decomposers)
8.____Minerals
K. To mix organic materials together (compost)
9.____Decomposer
s
L. Central layer of Earth (extra)
M. name for magma when it reaches the Earth (extra)
10.____Compost
157
Multiple Choice Test
Multiple Choice Directions: Read each statement. Circle the best answer choice.
1. The continuous breaking down of rocks would lead to the formation of what
natural resource?
A. water
B. minerals
C. coal
D. soil
2. The breaking down of rock, a process that helps form soil, is calledA. growth
B. sedimentation
C. flow
D. weathering
3. In addition to rock, what are the main components of soil?
A. bacteria and microbes
B. plant and animal remains
C. mushrooms and other fungi
D. worms and Insects
4. How would the soil be different in an area that gets very little rainfall? The soil
would containA. a greater variety of plants
B. fewer bits of broken rock
C. many insects and worms
D. less water and organic matter
5. What could be done to the rock above to turn it into the beginning states of soil?
158
A. flip it upside down
B. put it in a dark closet
C. hit it with a hammer
D. place it on a table
6. Weathering is important because itA. wears away rock to form soil
B. gives water to the plants we eat
C. blows seeds across for distances
D. cools and heats the land
7. Which of these is NOT weathering?
A. light
B. wind
C. water
D. earthquakes
8. Rocks are important because theyA. break down soil
B. contain minerals
C. are made of plants
D. are Earth’s most important resources
9. Humus can best be described asA. weathered rocks
B. loam & minerals
C. decayed plants and animals
D. clay and particles of sand
10. Why is weathering important to plants and animals
A. It contains food that plants and animals need to live.
B. It creates water that plants and animals need to grow.
C. It breaks down rocks into soil that contain minerals they need.
D. It protects smaller plants and animals from floods and earthquakes.
159
Writing Prompt
Direction: Respond in writing to the following questions:
a). If you were able to play in a large pile of dirt, or soil, what kind would you like best?
b). Write about why you can do certain things with sandy soil
160
Formation of Soil Formation
Writing Rubric
Key Concepts:
o Soils are made up of small pieces of weathered rock.
o Soil contains many substances including decomposed
plant and animal remains.
o The material in soil (soil type) are different in different
areas.
o Soils have different characteristics.
o Soils have different purposes.
Mastered Level
Progression
Developing
Introductory
Level
Level
Level
Covered ALL
Covered 75% of
Covered 50% of
Covered less
key concepts in
the key
the key
than 50% of the
the writing
concepts in the
concepts in the
writing essay
essay
writing essay
writing essay
(1)
(4)
(3)
(2)
*Adapted from Fourth Grade Science TAKS Scoring Guide
161
APPENDIX C
CHECKLIST FOR OBSERVATIONS AND VIDEOTAPE
Checklist for Fidelity to be used with Videotaping
Date:_________ Class________
1. Did the teacher introduce the new concept for the day’s lesson? Y
N
2. Were vocabulary terms introduced?
Y
N
3. Did the teacher introduce the book?
Y
N
4. Did the teacher point to the title of book?
Y
N
5. Did the teacher point to the table of contents?
Y
N
6. Did the teacher ask the students to predict what the text would be
about?
Y
N
Y
N
8. Did the teacher stop at a specific page and ask 2 questions?
Y
N
9. Did the teacher call on at least one student for each question?
Y
N
10. Did the read the book in its entirety?
Y
N
11. Did the teacher ask at least 2 questions after reading the book? Y
N
12. Did the teacher call on at least one person for each question?
Y
N
13. Did the teacher tell the students about the next day’s lesson?
Y
N
7. Did the teacher call on at least 2 students to share their
prediction?
Additional Notes
162
APPENDIX D
TABLE OF PROCEDURES FOR DAY 2-8
Day 2
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson /Concept
Introduction: Soil
Formation
Concept Mapping
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “soil formation” .
The cards will be placed on
the front board next to the
word “soil formation”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
concept of “soil formation”.
Vocabulary Introduction
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Earthworms, vitamins, shelter, predator, protect, root,
isopod
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera.
Students will have an opportunity to share what they think
the book will be about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 11.
During Reading Questions:
The teacher will ask the following questions:
1. What/Who depends on soil?
2. How is soil a habitat?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. How do we protect soil?
2. How do animals help make soil?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud: Without Soil
Comparison Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction:
Soil Formation
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
soil formation. The written
responses will be collected
by the teacher for data
collection purposes.
163
Post-Reading Activities
Concept Mapping
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
purposes.
Students will be given a
pre-generated concept map
that is 90% completed.
Students will use the word
bank located under the
graphic section of the
concept map.
Day 3
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson /Lesson
Introduction:
Dirt
Concept Mapping
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “dirt” .
The cards will be placed on
the front board next to the
word “dirt”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
Quick Write
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
“ How would life be like
without soil?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering this question
independently on their
piece of paper. Writing
will be collected for data
collection purposes.
Comparison
Lesson/Concept
Introduction: Dirt
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
dirt. The written responses
will be collected by the
teacher for data collection
purposes.
164
concept of “dirt”.
Vocabulary Introduction
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud: Dirt
Post-Reading Activities
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
dirt, humus, silt, clay, decomposers
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera.
Students will have an opportunity to share what they think
the book will be about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 11.
During Reading Questions:
The teacher will ask the following questions:
1. How is dirt and soil the same?
2. How are the layers of sand different?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. What is humus and why is it important?
2. How can animals make soil better for plants?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Concept Mapping
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
purposes.
Students will be given a
pre-generated concept map
that is 75% completed.
Students will use the word
blank that is located on the
concept mapping sheet to
complete the concept map.
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
“Why is sand best for
making sand castles?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering this question
independently on their
piece of paper. The
writing will be collected
for data collection
purposes.
165
Day 4
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction:
Erosion
Concept Mapping
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “erosion”.
The cards will be placed on
the front board next to the
word “erosion”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
concept of “erosion”.
Vocabulary Introduction
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Erosion, weathering, sediments, global warming
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera. Students will have an
opportunity to share what they think the book will be
about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 15.
During Reading Questions:
The teacher will ask the following questions:
1. What is erosion?
2. How does erosion affect the Earth?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. How can we prevent erosion?
2. What are the types of erosion?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud: Without Soil
Post-Reading Activities
Concept Mapping
Comparison Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction: Erosion
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
erosion. The written
responses will be collected
by the teacher for data
collection purposes.
Comprehension
166
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
purposes.
Students will be given a
pre-generated concept map
that is 75% completed.
Students will complete the
concept using the words
from the word bank that is
located on the concept
mapping sheet.
Questioning with Writing
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
“How has
erosion affected
the Earth?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering this question
independently on their
piece of paper. The
paper will be collected
for data collection
purposes.
Day 5
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction:
Types of Erosion
Concept Mapping
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “types of erosion”.
The cards will be placed
on the front board next to
the words “types of
erosion”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
concept of “types of
erosion”.
Comparison Group
Lesson /Concept
Introduction:
Types of Erosion
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
types of erosion.
Students’ responses will be
collected by the teacher for
data collection purposes.
Vocabulary Introduction
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Wind erosion, ice erosion, soil erosion, conservation,
167
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud: Erosion
Post-Reading Activities
hurricanes
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera.
Students will have an opportunity to share what they think
the book will be about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 13.
During Reading Questions: The teacher will ask the
following questions:
1. How do waves cause erosion?
2. How was the Grand Canyon formed?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. How do hurricanes cause erosion?
2. What is conservation?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Concept Mapping
Students will be given an
opportunity to compare this
map to the class map.
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
purposes.
Day 6
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson /Concept
Introduction: Minerals
Concept Mapping
Comprehension Questions
with Writing
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
“How does
conservation help
Earth?”
“What ways can you
conserve?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering these two
questions independently
on their piece of paper.
The paper will collected
for data collection
purposes.
Comparison Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction: Minerals
Comprehension
168
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “minerals”.
The cards will be placed on
the front board next to the
word “minerals”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
concept of “minerals”.
Vocabulary Introduction
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud: Minerals
Post-Reading Activities
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
minerals. Students’
responses will be collected
by the teacher for data
collection purposes.
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Minerals, element, atom, crystal, properties
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera.
Students will have an opportunity to share what they think
the book will be about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 15.
During Reading Questions:
The teacher will ask the following questions:
1. How are minerals formed?
2. How are they grouped?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. Why are minerals important?
2. How are minerals different from each other?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Concept Mapping
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
Quick Writes
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
-“Why are minerals
different?”
169
purposes.
Students will be given a
pre-generated concept map
that is 50% completed.
Students will complete the
concept map using the
words from the word bank
that is located on the
concept mapping sheet.
-“Explain how minerals
are formed?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering this question
independently on their
piece of paper. The
paper will be collected
for data collection
purposes.
Day 7
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction: Earthworms
Concept Mapping
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “earthworms”.
The cards will be placed on
the front board next to the
word “earthworms”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
concept of “earthworms”.
Vocabulary Introduction
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Cocoon, burrows, castings
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, and title, using an Elmo
document camera.
Students will have an opportunity to share what they think
the book will be about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 13.
During Reading Questions: The teacher will ask the
following questions:
1. Why do farmers plow their field?
2. How do earthworms tunnel through sand?
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud: Wiggling
Worms
Comparison Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction: Earthworms
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
earthworms. Students’
responses will be collected
by the teacher for data
collection purposes.
170
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. How do we worms help new plants grow?
2. Why do worms cover dead plants?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Post-Reading Activities
Concept Mapping
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
purposes.
Students will be given a
pre-generated concept map
that is 25 % completed.
Students will complete the
concept map using words
from the word bank that is
located on the concept
mapping sheet.
Day 8
Pre-Reading
Experimental Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction: Composting
Concept Mapping
Students will write terms
on index cards associated
with “composting” .
The cards will be placed on
the front board next to the
word “composting”.
Lines will connect terms
using “connecting words”
to show the relationships
between the words and the
Comprehension Questions
with Writing
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
-“Why are worms
beneficial to helping
things grow?”
-“What is its role?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering this question
independently on their
piece of paper. The
paper will collected for
data collection purposes.
Comparison Group
Lesson/Concept
Introduction:
Composting
Comprehension
Questioning with Writing
Students will write on an
individual piece of paper for
3 minutes over the topic of
composting. The written
responses will be collected
by the teacher for data
collection purposes.
171
concept of “composting”.
Vocabulary Introduction
Interactive Informational
Read Aloud:
Composting: Nature’s
Recyclers
Post-Reading Activities
Teacher introduces vocabulary selected from text that will
be used in interactive informational read-aloud
Terms:
Composting, Compost, Decompose, Decomposers
Bacteria, Fungi
Prediction:
Teacher will show the cover, title, table of contents using
the Elmo document camera.
Students will have an opportunity to share what they think
the book will be about.
Reading of Text:
Teacher will read pg 4 to 13.
During Reading Questions: The teacher will ask the
following questions:
1. What is composting?
2. What is a compost heap?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
After-Reading Questions
1. What are decomposers?
2. What is their role in the compost heap?
Students will raise their hand to respond and teacher will
call on students.
Concept Mapping
Student will have an
opportunity to add to the
class concept map.
The teacher will take a
picture of the class
constructed concept map
for data collection
purposes.
Students will be given a
pre-generated concept map
that is 25% completed.
Students will complete
concept map using words
from the word bank that is
Comprehension Questions
with Writing
The teacher will ask the
following question taken
from the text used in the
informational interactive
read aloud:
“How does composting
affect or help the
environment?”
The students will spend
5 minutes writing on
answering this question
independently on their
piece of paper. The
writing will be collected
by the teacher for data
collection purposes.
172
located on the concept
mapping sheet.
173
VITA
Jaime Leigh Berry received her Bachelor of Science degree in education from
Sam Houston State University in 2000. She received her Masters of Educational
Leadership in 2003 from Stephen F. Austin State University. Then, she received her
Doctor of Philosophy in August of 2011 from Texas A&M University. Her research
interests include content area literacy, dyslexia and ESL. She will be an Assistant
Professor of Early Childhood Education at Armstrong Atlantic State University in
Savannah, Georgia in the fall of 2011.
Dr. Berry may be reached at Armstrong Atlantic State University, 11935
Abercorn Street, Savannah, GA 31419. Her email is [email protected].